Slashdot Mirror


Operation Payback Shuts Down IFPI Site

newtley writes "Vivendi Universal, EMI, Warner Music and Sony Music's main IFPI (International Federation of Phonographic Industry) website is down. Not coincidentally, there's an Operation Payback post addressing the Pirate Bay crew's lost sentencing appeal: 'Dear IFPI, MAFIAA and other parasites, The recent verdict in the Swedish Appeal Court (ThePirateBay spectrial) provoked this statement from Operation: Payback. We emphasize our statement with a Distributed Denial-of-Service attack aimed at the IFPI's website.'"

28 of 376 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Well, somebody's showing... by jdpars · · Score: 3, Informative

    What's the peaceful resolution they should be aiming for? What branch of the government can they appeal to to restrict the power of government to intervene without precedent? The courts are obviously not going to help them, nor the legislators, nor the president or any various governors.

  2. yeah by unity100 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    are you aware that what you are saying basically totals to 'just be subservient' ?

    the 'peaceful resolution' you speak of, has no effect. people elected someone on various premises, and he fulfilled maybe one out of a few dozen. people elected representatives on various issues, yet they set out to make laws totally against the will of public. they have even gone the extra mile of bringing out laws with NO transparency and democratic process, in the form of acta.

    then there is the 'noncriminal', legal ways of doing that eh ? like, battling them in courts, where they have multiples of money to win over you ?

    excuse me but what you speak of can only work in an ideal world.

    1. Re:yeah by icebraining · · Score: 4, Funny

      DoS, killing people, all the same! Death penalty for jaywalkers!

    2. Re:yeah by Scaba · · Score: 4, Informative

      Jay Walkers was framed!!

    3. Re:yeah by Haeleth · · Score: 4, Insightful

      the 'peaceful resolution' you speak of, has no effect

      That is not entirely true. Educating the public, and persuading the common people that overly restrictive copyright laws hurt them personally, would probably have a very positive effect.

      What effect do you think this direct action is going to have? Because I don't see it as likely to have any effect at all -- at least, not a positive one. Taking a website that nobody visited anyway offline for a few hours is hardly going to make the entire recording industry turn round and say "Oh God, what have we done? The real pirates were us all along!". At best it will be ignored. At worst it will be used to justify new censorship laws.

    4. Re:yeah by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Here's a little gem for you:

      Ethics is not black and white, and no ethics system that is more inherently "right" than another.

      "Unless you don't actually care about your ethics." translates to "unless you subscribe to an ethical system incompatible to mine."

    5. Re:yeah by unity100 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Like getting voters to care enough about copyright law that it gets changed (because let's face it, most people don't care about copyright law)?

      i wont even comment on that. i think anyone with little insight would have realized by now that with this capitalist economic system and the current democratic election process, there is no way that people's interests can overcome private interests due to control of those interests on all aspects of life in the economic part. like mass media, donations and so on.

      Like, not buying their music?

      and, that's the naive bit. your not buying music will not have effect, because they have heaps of cash signing over any band you are buying now. to refuse them, that band has to have a lot of principles, and choose to stay small, or, have a lot of willpower and break out of it like radiohead.

      and the above situation does not even take into account the fact that those interests can manufacture laws or conditions that will render your indie music outlets ineffective, like killing network neutrality and asking them big money for transit.

      If you're going to get into a fight over this, you should pick a fight that you can win. Like the non-violent methods of MLK, who broke the law in a way that brought attention and public opinion over to their side. Starting a Pirate Bay might possibly be considered that. Doing a vengeful DDOS does not do that. It shows that in fact, those who oppose copyright really are unethical criminals who only want the law changed so they can do unethical things more easily.

      you are only saying this, because you dont know enough about history, especially on the subject you speak of.

      mlks non violent methods were ENTIRELY organized violation of existing laws. flat out. there were segregation laws, and they have contested those laws, they DISOBEYED them, in an organized manner. so much that, at a point even mlk has exclaimed that, their organization moved like a military structure, very efficiently.

      and that only succeeded, because they were moving from states that did not have those laws, and the federal government, a stronger entity than those states, were sympathetic to them in general.

      had the federal government been the party observing those laws, things would turn out different, and the nonviolent VIOLATION of law by disobedience, would not succeed. history is filled with such cases.

      please dont talk on matters on which you do not have sufficient information, like this assumption of yours regarding 'legal' nonviolent methods of mlk.

      If you fight unethically, then even if you win, you find the victory isn't worth winning. Unless you don't actually care about your ethics.

      there is no 'ethical' fighting against an oppressor. excuse me, but oppressors are called oppressors, exactly because they do not provide you any acceptable means to refuse their oppression.

    6. Re:yeah by countertrolling · · Score: 3, Insightful

      so, public's opinion, mattered ZIT.

      Ah, but it was played beautifully. Dissipating anger into disappointment. The dems acted as place holders until the Bush thing blows over.. In the same fashion they did between Ford and Reagan because of Nixon. Like good tag team partners, the dems tap the repubs to jump back into the ring.. to a cheering crowd... It's quite a sight. Public opinion is everything. It must be carefully controlled.

      --
      For justice, we must go to Don Corleone
    7. Re:yeah by unity100 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      that is because those masses can still get that gaga song free, through other means.

    8. Re:yeah by The+Hatchet · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Would you rather punish people or fix them? I vote the latter, prison is the former. And as it so happens, prisons tend to just make small time first offenders into hardened criminals with nothing to live for, as you lose pretty much any chance of getting a good job, living in a nice neighborhood, having friends outside of prison, after you have been there. We could instead rehabilitate criminals and help them get into social positions where continuing a criminal lifestyle would be harmful to them, instead of practically unavoidable.

      Personally, I don't see the purpose in conviction for revenge. Shit happens, and when it happens to you, you need to get over it instead of spending the rest of your life watching another man suffer in what goes far beyond revenge. Punishment doesn't dissuade crime, wealth does. If we fixed poverty instead of fucking the poor as much as possible and ensuring that there are always more and more poor around, there would be a lot less reason for them to commit crimes. If you don't need the money to live, you are a lot less likely to steal it.

      Or we could just be dumbasses and tell people to suck it up and not do bad things as if it will make a difference. The 'suck it up' mentality achieves nothing for society. The "hey, a problem, lets fix it" mentality does.

      --
      Where is the mod rating for "scary"? Also, ...
  3. What the hell is the point? by BitHive · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I bet 99% of people on either side of this issue have never been to ifpi.org, what exactly is this supposed to accomplish?

    1. Re:What the hell is the point? by Pharmboy · · Score: 4, Funny

      Exactly, if they really wanted to hurt them, wouldn't an attack on something that would cost them real money (like a RIAA-blessed streaming music service) be more damaging?

      I got a better idea, we need to hit them financially. Let's distribute pirated copies of their movies for free, using P2P. Just think, if we can get 1 million people to download their movies, that means they will have lost $20 million in sales, since everyone knows that every time a movie is pirated, it equals exactly one lost sale. That would show them.

      --
      Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
  4. Re:Once again we prove... by Cl1mh4224rd · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Whether Anonymous is right or wrong is for you to decide. But under either case, you don't mess with them.

    What a utterly stupid statement. That's justification for doing nothing about bad behavior by any individual or organization simply because they engage in bad behavior, and those who engage in bad behavior are not to be messed with.

    --
    People will pass up steak once a week, for crap every day.
  5. Don't listen to, or view recorded media? by rh775 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The best response to these types of organization is not through government or peaceful resolution. Even by stealing the media these organizations represent you are part of the problem which limits human potential. We can all stop buying (or even stealing) music that these organizations control. If you enjoy music and film, learn to create something of your own and share it. Subvert the organizations, not their websites/servers. Go to free, live performances, learn an instrument, write a screenplay or lyrics, share your creations in public or over the internet.

    1. Re:Don't listen to, or view recorded media? by airfoobar · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Even if everyone stopped buying from those companies, they'd still find a way to make themselves a tax. You'll be buying Lady Gaga songs every time you pay your water bill.

      The only way to fix things is to: 1) make corporate lobbying illegal and put all politicians' dealings in the open, and 2) perform an evidence-based reform of copyright law to restore it to a reasonable length and scope.

      In doing those things, a lot that is wrong with America will automatically correct itself. Alas, things may already be beyond repair...

    2. Re:Don't listen to, or view recorded media? by __aaqvdr516 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Unfortunately, if we stop buying their media, they'll simply assume we're stealing it anyways because there is *no way* that their profits should ever shrink. It is the best option and the easiest to implement though and it's the method I've been using for quite some time already.

  6. Yes it serves a purpose by Palmsie · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It seems many here are quick to criticize the immaturity or pointlessness of launching a DOS on some arbitrary website no one ever visits, which is their right. However, I think launching an assault on a website (especially as Anonymous) serves a very important purpose, both functionally and symbolically. It conveys a very direct voice of opposition against companies shutting down websites like TPB or (as we've seen just this week) other torrent domains without due process. It is very clear that those companies and politicians have no idea how these websites function. Rightly so, they are made in a tiered and complex fashion so as to spread, eliminate, or avoid liability, as is the case in the OP (e.g. i-frames, torrents with no trackers, using only links to other sites but not actually hosting any illegal content). However, this isn’t an excuse for the judicial system to say that merely because a system is too complex to understand that those who are genuinely innocent should be lumped in with the guilty. That is ridiculous and I’m sure no one would agree with such a verdict. So while many people on Slashdot might complain about the point of DOS’ing a website, it says very loud and clear to those ignorant parties that people won’t stand for this kind of tyranny. Good for them, I say.

    --
    Carl Sagan quotes get you an automatic +5 on all posts.
  7. Parasites? by cornicefire · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I know that many of the corporations are pretty sleezy and they make money off the backs of the artists, but the pirate sites do exactly the same thing. At least the corporate suits give a few percent to the artists. The pirate sites keep it all for themselves. If you're going to do this thing, study the masters like Richard Stallman and write something intellectually coherent about intellectual property. Make a solid argument and it's more likely to be respected.

  8. Re:Rebels leading the charge! Freedom fighters uni by madprof · · Score: 4, Insightful

    No, the inequality of wealth has a reasonable effect on the level of social cohesion within a country. Obviously people are materially better off now than poor people were in the 1920s. You'd expect that. But it doesn't mean that the poor people today have the same opportunities (despite the best intentions of law makers) to progress in their lives as those who are raised in rich households.

  9. Re:Rebels leading the charge! Freedom fighters uni by QuoteMstr · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'm impressed: I couldn't squeeze that many fallacies into the same sentence if I tried. You're arguing that poor people aren't productive, and that the welfare state, with its progressive taxation, is "slavery"? You're really arguing that people who make millions would be less "productive" if taxed at a higher rate? If you're posting on Slashdot, it's exceedingly likely that you are not wealthy enough for our current plutocratic policies to work in your favor.

    You illustrate my point perfectly: you've been convinced by the propaganda of the ultra-wealthy and their lapdogs to argue (and presumably, vote) against your own economic interests and damn our country in the process.

  10. Re:Rebels leading the charge! Freedom fighters uni by QuoteMstr · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Your class-baiting, "the pie can never grow, so the only way for anyone to enter the middle class is to take money from somebody else" clap-trap is embarassingly juvenile.

    The pie is growing, but the wealthy are taking the vast majority of the increase:

    In recent years, the statistics regarding income disparity in America have been startling. After-tax annual income for the bottom fifth of American households inched up just 6 percent form 1979 to 2005, according to the Congressional Budget Office. During that time, income for the middle fifth of households grew by a modest 21 percent, with much of that gain caused by women in many households working more hours. Over that same period, income for the top fifth of households jumped by an impressive 80 percent, while income for the top 1 percent more than tripled, soaring by 228 percent.

    The wealth disparity itself is a problem, but worse is the corrosive effect this wealth has on our political structure: those with money and influence are increasingly able to purchase government policies that further increase their share of the pie even at the expense of the total size of the pie. It's a positive feedback loop: more wealth leads to more power, and more power leads to greater wealth. This feedback is why I'm so dour about our prospects: the cycle seems impossible to break.

    The little things we agitate about today: censorship, abuse of copyright, overzealous airport security, our foreign wars, the loss of our manufacturing jobs, are all caused by the increasing ability of the wealthy to pervert government to work in their favor. When power is concentrated in a few hands, the result is inevitably selfish exercise of that power and poor outcomes.

  11. Re:Rebels leading the charge! Freedom fighters uni by TooMuchToDo · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I would not consider someone who makes $100 million/year trading oil on a commodities market to be a productive person. No value is added, only value extracted from a system.

    http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE57D3PQ20090814

    The definition of "poor" is slowly encompassing more and more of the middle class in the US. I'd make sure you're on the right side when the pitchforks come out after the 21st century equivalent of "let them eat cake" occurs.

  12. Re:Well, somebody's showing... by unity100 · · Score: 3, Insightful
    there is no accountability in western world. because, the ones to make the responsibles pay for anything, are the ones who are committing anything that needs accountability.

    like, bush crowd, and their unwarranted laws, constitutional violations.

    who is going to prosecute them ? supreme court ? THEY are the one appointing the supreme court justices.

    like, bp oil spill. who is to prosecute them ? the senators who are their collaborators ? the administration which cooperated with them ?

    what you say, is only naivete.

    and, no, youre wrong, there isnt even the pretense of being accountable when it comes to putting somebody in jail or prison in the u.s.

    http://www.alternet.org/rights/144656/%22we_can_make_him_disappear%22:_immigration_officials_are_holding_people_in_secret,_unmarked_jails

    "If you don't have enough evidence to charge someone criminally but you think he's illegal, we can make him disappear." Those chilling words were spoken by James Pendergraph, then executive director of Immigration and Customs Enforcement's (ICE) Office of State and Local Coordination, at a conference of police and sheriffs in August 2008.

    http://www.thenation.com/article/americas-secret-ice-castles

  13. please by unity100 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    dont talk about knowing jack shit.

    standard of living and distribution of income are two irrelevant concepts.

    standard of living changes with technology and times, and is not dependent on distribution of income.

    currently, average american lives in far better standards than a medieval serf. but, s/he gets FAR less than the economy, than a mere medieval serf got in middle ages :

    http://sociology.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/wealth.html

    therefore, a medieval serf's standard of living, COMPARED to the max standard of living in middle ages, comes much higher than the standard of living of an average american, compared to the max standard of living currently.

    you need to brush up on your statistics knowledge. the one which does not exist, that is.

  14. Re:Well, somebody's showing... by Moryath · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It was "illegal" for those who were participating in lunch counter sit-ins.

    The point was, the law was wrong, not the people.

    The same is true today. The problem is with the MafiAA types, not the people doing the protesting.

  15. Re:Rebels leading the charge! Freedom fighters uni by wierd_w · · Score: 4, Interesting

    This is a very dangerous kettle of fish that is being passed around here. I really don't want to reach my hand in, but here it goes anyway.

    The previous poster about FDR (being a crook) is absolutely correct. Even a cursory examination of the impacts of his political policies during the depression reveals that unemployment skyrocketed after the formation of the new deal, and that living conditions took serious turns for the worse. Further, he enacted the atrocity that is the federal reserve bank, against the bitter pleas of more sensible men at the time, due to strong influences from foreign powers. (The run-away inflationary cycle of which is what is at least partially responsible for the banking failures of the past few years.) In addition, he created an executive order that seized all privately held gold, and transferred it to government coffers to back the new deal.

    The multitudes of destitute people made for a very willing public, eager to be saved from the outcome of their own panic. (the 1930s bank crash resulted from panicked crowds making runs on banks. The natural way that banks make money is by lending more than they have in the vault, and depending upon interest payments for the returns on investment. If everyone makes a run on the bank, the bank will be caught with its britches down, and default on its extended credit. At the time there was no protecting agencies like the FDIC, since there was no national reserve bank. [yes, I called it an atrocity, I'll get to that later.] Because of this the banks of the era HAD to be more sensible in their loaning practices. Despite this, the bank scare caught them at a disadvantage, So, as a matter of consequence, the bank and loan industry crumbled under its own debts, resulting in a massive deflationary spiral, leaving millions unemployed, and many more homeless as people with mortgages got foreclosed on by banks desperate to pay off their debts to remain solvent. Essentially, a substantial amount of the currency that was PREVIOUSLY in circulation, was now stuffed into wealthy people's mattresses. As such, there was a dramatic currency shortage. (Deflation.)

    These people were desperate, and would have eagerly accepted a deal from the devil himself. They got pretty much that with FDR and his new deal.

    The federal reserve bank.

    This new agency had been tried before. It was successfully eliminated by Andrew Jackson, under the incarnation of the "Central Bank". Andrew Jackson is the ONLY president in the history of the united states to pay off the national debt, by halting all deficit spending, paying off it's debts, and dissolving the bank's charter to make more loans. This prior president had some rather choice words to say about it in fact.

    **
    "The bold effort the present (central) bank had made to control the government ... are but premonitions of the fate that await the American people should they be deluded into a perpetuation of this institution or the establishment of another like it."
    **
    "Gentlemen, I have had men watching you for a long time and I am convinced that you have used the funds of the bank to speculate in the breadstuffs of the country. When you won, you divided the profits amongst you, and when you lost, you charged it to the bank. You tell me that if I take the deposits from the bank and annul its charter, I shall ruin ten thousand families. That may be true, gentlemen, but that is your sin! Should I let you go on, you will ruin fifty thousand families, and that would be my sin! You are a den of vipers and thieves."
    **
    "I am one of those who do not believe that a national debt is a national blessing, but rather a curse to a republic; inasmuch as it is calculated to raise around the administration a moneyed aristocracy dangerous to the liberties of the country."

    -- amongst others.

    So then-- What is the federal reserve bank, and what does it do?

    The federal reserve bank codifies lending practices (in general a good thing), but by design creates exponential inflati

  16. Re:Well, somebody's showing... by SuricouRaven · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I think it's more the equivilent of another protest tradition: The sit-in deliberatly in front of a doorway. It's non-violent, but intended to cause disruption to business.

  17. Sure but DDOS isn't the correct protest, TAX is. by IBitOBear · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Rather than trying to crash the server, Anonymous should be building a targeted spider of all the sites related to the offender. These sites should be carefully and constantly farmed of their content with due care to make sure the site isn't ever actually brought down.

    So instead of a DOS, you levy a TAX. Yes, tax the site, as in "that was a very taxing experience".

    There are several important results of TAXing a site.

    (1) bandwidth charges go up, so there is TAXing and taxing both.
    (2) You are never really stepping over the line legally because you didn't "interfere" with their business.
    (3) You have an affront-in-depth because you can TAX the core site, and all the accomplice sites. So not just IPFI but Sony Music, and all thier ilk.
    (4) The each TAX collector gets the best use of their action.
    (5) you are likely wearing out the gear a little too.

    So, to use the physical analogy, take all your sit-in participants and, instead of "blocking the door" you make a velvet rope maze of sitters that complicit actors would have to navigate.

    Think of it this way... If you block the door to a bank you will get rousted by the man. If you get 1000 people to go to the bank, stand quietly in line, and when they reach the teller have them perform a cash-only or information-only transaction (e.g. "can I get change for a ten?" "I need to check my balance.") Go get a brochure, read it, then go ask a question in person or on the toll-free number like "This says the interest rate is good for six months. Does that start on the day I open an account, the end of the month I open the account, or the start of the month I open the account?", get the answer, thank the support guy and hang up.

    So sure, fill out forms; File polite inquiries, visit their sponsors and members; fill out forms and file polite inquiries.

    If brochures are available, ask for one. Recommend they contact a friend. Recommend they contact an enemy. Ask for more information by every possible venue to every reasonable destination.

    Get their site to _vomit_ _up_ as much bandwidth and postage. Buy one share. Get the actual share certificate printed up and mailed to you. Then sell the share to your friend for a loss. Make sure he gets his share certificate as well. Buy his share for a loss on the same day and get your new certificate. (best done in a bg circle not just two guys. 8-)

    A reject connect attempt is cheap compared to actually fetching a web page or sending out an email that was composed by a support-desk guy, or even a support desk automation.

    Find business reply coupons and _use_ them.

    At first it isn't as splashy, but you know what, when they run to their government buddies and whine "but they are using our free services exactly as offered" their buddies will probably laugh.

    --
    Innocent people shouldn't be forced to pay for inferior software development.
    --"Code Complete" Microsoft Press