UK Law Enforcement Starts Seizing Music Blogs

Grumbleduke writes "From Dajaz1 (a site that is no stranger to unjustified copyright takedowns) we learn that the popular R&B website rnbxclusive.com (warning: threatening message on site) has allegedly been seized by the Serious Organized Crime Agency, a UK law enforcement agency, and its operators arrested on fraud charges. Not only does the replacement message contain a number of factually dubious claims, it also shows the visitor's IP address, browser and operating system, and threatens to track and monitor them. At a time when copyright lobby groups are strongly pushing for even greater powers through laws such as SOPA and ACTA, one is left wondering why they think they need them, when police can shut down websites such as this at will."

Comments

Darknets

[Anonymous Coward]

Time to switch to the darknets. At least until their generation dies off and some reason returns.

Re:Darknets

[Penguinisto]

A nice thought, but the problem lies in the fact that it isn't just a single generation soaked with this particular poison.

If it were just a matter of waiting until Orrin Hatch died off, that would be easy. OTOH, the MPAA and RIAA likely employs an awful lot of 30-somethings, as well as a lot of duped people out there who swallowed their propaganda... and that's going to take at least half a century before they die off.

I'm afraid we're stuck with either fighting, or watching the whole thing get strangled.

There is no reliable means or method to hide anymore - no matter how many TOR nodes you traversed to get your packets here. If they cannot reach you now, they will find ways to insure that they can (a heavily-modified and enforced TPM on all devices, anyone?)

Better to fight them now than suffer under their burdens later.

Re:Darknets

[Anonymous Coward]

I bet 7 proxies would be enough to keep from being tracked.

Re:Darknets

[Anonymous Coward]

Assholes are born into every generation. And, the stupid people that swallow all their shit are also. Good luck to the rest.

Re:Darknets

[History's Coming To]

I actually found it rather useful to test a IP/user-agent switching plugin. (I use it to test environment sensitive sections of websites I write). All works fine, which IP address would they like me to come from?

The irony with this whol thing is I'm anti-piracy, I'm one of those weirdos who thinks artists deserve to get money for what they produce, however easy it is to copy bit for bit. But that SOCA message strikes me offensive and wildly accusatory that I'm starting to think my anti-piracy crusade needs to go on the back burner while I deal with the important thing, keeping the internet free.

Re:Darknets

[Nethemas the Great]

You're not weird. Most people believe artist should be compensated for their work. The trouble is the MPAA/RIAA, their ilk and their members do not.

Re:Darknets

[flyneye]

Yeah, well I noticed the U.K. serious sissy patrol neglected to leave any contact information so I could ridicule them about tracking me and offer them a taste of my stool. Common tactic.

Re:Darknets

[AaronLS]

The manipulators, and the manipulated. The biggest problem with this world.

This woman I worked with got a hoax email saying mars would appear the next night as big as the moon, supposedly from NASA(which had themselves published an article saying they were not the source of the email and that it was hoax). I told her it was a hoax, to save her the disappointment of taking her kids to stare at the bland city lit sky all night. She got pissed off at me, like I was some horrible person who must be an idiot because she was convinced the email was originated by NASA.

This is the typical hostile response of these gullible idiots across the full spectrum of bullshit, from meaningless trolling hoaxes to political deception and corruption. How dare you try to make them aware that they are idiots.

It was no surprise to me at the time that as an army reservist(not saying this is typical of all reservists, just a side note of her perspective) she bought into the whole "We have to kill 3000 Iraqis to make up for 9/11 and stop them from making weapons of mass destruction" as well as the "If you oppose the war then you are a treasonous bastard and you must hate America". She was also the one coworker who required my help more than anyone else. Almost constantly I was rolling over to her desk in response to her mind boggling failure to do her job independently and apply problem solving skills to the hurdles she encountered.

Re:Darknets

[whoever57]

Yeah, well I noticed the U.K. serious sissy patrol neglected to leave any contact information so I could ridicule them about tracking me and offer them a taste of my stool

So leave a message in their logs, go to: http://rnbxclusive.com/SOCA_Are_Wankers or some similar URL

Re:Darknets

[wbr1]

You'r not strange at all. I beleive artists should be paid. However, as the music industry stand most get paid a pittance while corps rake in huge money and spend it on ways to make more with lobbying, and pay execs self congratulatory fortunes. The record company model made far more sense when tney had to fund expensive studios, and actually manufacture a physical product. Now it has morphed into simple greed, and inertia and money keep it moving.

Re:Darknets

[gmack]

I understand your offense but I wonder if anyone has considered that this whole thing could be a hoax.

  Domain servers in listed order:
        SK.S7.ANS1.NS103.KLCZY.COM
        SK.S7.ANS2.NS103.KLCZY.COM

If a government agency had grabbed the domain wouldn't they have changed the hosting to something they control rather than some cheap name service whose homepage seems to only be an ad portal?

Re:Darknets

[Fned]

...I'm one of those weirdos who thinks artists deserve to get money for what they produce, however easy it is to copy bit for bit.

Artists produce copies? Weird, I thought they produced creative works.

Maybe if copies were still worth something, charging for them would still make sense.

Re:Darknets

[interkin3tic]

There is NOTHING ironic about it! Don't muddy the waters even a little bit. None of us fighting against censorship and government control are pro-piracy. The people stealing music who can't be bothered to cough up a dollar for that pop song they like don't give two shits about the long-term damage they're causing to freedom of expression. They're not on our side, they're one side of the war of greed, the mafIAA is on the other. Our rights and the artists are stuck in between.

A thousand times: being opposed to draconian schemes to crack down on your freedom like this DOES NOT MAKE YOU PRO-PIRACY.

Re:Darknets

[arisvega]

Indeed.

"Your IP: xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx" (note: not my IP)

"Your Browser: Unknown"

"Your OS: Unknown"

Re:Darknets

[sugarbomb]

Complain away!

http://www.soca.gov.uk/contact-soca/complaints

Complaints
We do our utmost to provide the public with the best possible service, and to act professionally and courteously at all times. However if you want to complain about SOCA or a SOCA officer, first please look at our complaints process

Then, if you wish to make a complaint, you can contact:

SOCA Counter Corruption Department
PO Box 58396,
London
NW1W 9SB

Telephone: 020 7238 2626
Email: publiccomplaints@soca.x.gsi.gov.uk

If you would rather complain to the Independent Police Complaints Commission or you are not happy with the way your complaint about a SOCA officer has been handled, you should contact:

The Independent Police Complaints Commission
90 High Holborn
London
WC1V 6BH

Telephone: 08453 002 002
Email: enquiries@ipcc.gsi.gov.uk

Re:Darknets

[Anonymous Coward]

Not if the government finishes its work on the Trace-Buster-Buster-Buster-Buster-Buster-Buster-Buster-Buster.

Re:Darknets

[russotto]

I actually found it rather useful to test a IP/user-agent switching plugin. (I use it to test environment sensitive sections of websites I write). All works fine, which IP address would they like me to come from?

Didn't work for me. My operating system came out as "unknown", despite being bog-standard Safari on a Mac running Snow Leopard.

Re:Darknets

[Anonymous Coward]

There are only so many combinations of words, and so many combinations of posible note configurations (within say a 5m song)

Eventually we run out, then what?

Re:Darknets

[Anonymous Coward]

Email: enquiries@ipcc.gsi.gov.uk

You need to take out the .gsi part of that address.
Fucking morons don't seem to appreciate what the i stands for... mail sent from the Internet to a gsi address usually doesn't even bounce.

Re:Darknets

[ColdWetDog]

These guys are into Serious crime. They don't want to deal with small volume, unknown Operating Systems run by petty criminals.

Re:Darknets

[nbauman]

It wasn't just expensive studios and physical product.

They used to spend a lot of money developing new talent and marketing. They might pay an upcoming star $100,000 for a year while they wait for her to take off (if ever). Living expenses, travel, ads in Variety and Rolling Stone, and cocaine are expensive.

I'm not sure whether these were productive expenses or whether they were just the cost of positioning themselves on the top in a competitive market. *Somebody* is going to have a hit, whether it's a corporate-promoted work or not. We had music before the days of big corporations, and we'll still have music if they go.

Re:Darknets

[DERoss]

"Your Browser: Mozilla10" There is no such browser!

Re:Darknets

[Anonymous Coward]

while true; do wget -O /dev/null http://rnbxclusive.com/England_Can_Suck_My_Cock; done

Re:Darknets

[Anonymous Coward]

So did she end up looking for Mars?

Re:Darknets

[Cinder6]

Their name is actually a really good description: Serious Organized Crime Agency. From the description of what they do, it does sound like they're criminals, organized, and an official agency. And their wording is very serious.

Oh wait, they say they're the good guys? They might have wanted another word in there. "Prevention" right before Agency, or some such. Just a thought. They're monitoring my Internet activity now, so I don't need to write them a letter. They already saw this post. Right? Right??

Re:Darknets

[ThePeices]

We dont realistically run out, the number of combinations is mind boggling.

Re:Darknets

[EdIII]

I agree that we need to fight now. Darknets would be a step towards that.

TOR does reliably hide people. I have seen white papers on trying to analyze TOR networks, but I am not convinced that it would work on a large scale. Too many nodes to monitor. TOR is by no means the most advanced technology out there. You have Freenet and other Darknets being developed as we speak.

The real war will be stepping up with rampant civil disobedience on enforced TPM. Refuse to purchase the devices, go to underground markets to get your equipment, etc.

That is the end game, the final battlefield. Encryption. All roads lead to it. It will either be controlled, which means freedom died, or it will remain uncontrolled, and enable freedom to survive.

Re:Darknets

[Anonymous Coward]

People downloading music and movies online isn't opposed to giving artists their due, but in this day and age it's so easy to distribute the material, and that should reflect in the price. The companies doesn't have to have large storage spaces for their collection, where the sale is 1 to 1 (one physical copy, one sale), no need for logistics problems and a whole host of other issues.

The Internet-generation wants it ANYWHERE, ANYHOW, ANYTIME, not just when someone decides we can have it, where someone decides we can have, just the way someone decides we should have it. When I buy a song, I own the rights to play that song for myself and a (very small) group of people. That's MY right. And I have the RIGHT to listen to that song WHENEVER AND WHEREVER I want within certain constraints, such as I can't use it to make money for myself, can't copy it off to friends. But I have still bought the RIGHT to listen to that song. In some cases, I've paid for the same song several times, like LPs, cassette tapes, CDs, DVDs, MP3s. Same with movies. I have bought the RIGHT to watch it at MY leisure. That means that when I buy a Blu-Ray video, I have the RIGHT to rip that film to watch it on any hardware, in any situation *I* want. No, I still don't have the right to sell it or give a copy to my friends, but that's not the point either.

And when they release something the world wants in USA in spring 2010 and won't release it to the rest of the world until fall 2011 (TV-shows mainly come to mind), it's no wonder we get frustrated. Frustrated knowing that there's something AWESOME available.... if you live in the USA.

Give us the option of paying the music/movie/software/TV-companies directly or through something like Hulu or Netflix or iTunes or Download.com or YouTube or whatever, for a digital copy we can watch/listen to/use when we want, how we want, worldwide as it becomes available, and the problem with illegal filesharing will go down significantly. It will never disappear for the simple fact that some people refuse to pay, some people CAN'T pay (at least not the exorbitant prices of today), some people have no WAY of paying (doesn't have a credit card or PayPal or other means of transferring money digitally), and some people won't know (at least in the beginning) that there's a legal alternative.

The fight of the "pirates" of today are for the freedom of the internet. After we (hopefully) win that battle, we'll likely fight for the rights of artists to actually get paid for their work. As it is today, they don't. I don't remember which case was described, but I saw an infographic about someone who lost a filesharing case about music. When the sum of the fine was calculated against the many hours of work of paralegals, lawyers, PR-agents and so on, the ARTIST ended up owing RIAA's lawyers almost the same amount as the court-ordered fine the DEFENDANT was given. And not to forget the case of Alannah Myles. Remember her hit "Black Velvet"? 12 years after she recorded the version the record company wanted her to do (artistic integrity? what's that?), she received her first (and AFAIK only) royalty check: US$1900.

Several studies, one from Netherlands from 2009 and one released recently, shows that music and video piracy does not affect box office returns, and actually helps the recording industry. And pirates are on average larger customers than their non-pirate brothers and sisters. Several studies show that too.

Fight for THE WORLD first, then we'll take on the injustices of the RIAA / MPAA / BSA towards their artists. We first need to secure the only weapon that's so powerful that we can fight them on other issues later.

Re:Darknets

[Anonymous Coward]

Personally I turned pro-piracy because of draconian laws and the abuses committed for the defense of artists.
No, I don't want music at the expense of the artists. I realize if artists don't get paid, they'll stop making the music I like. Same with games, movies, etc.
But between giving up on art or giving up on my rights, I'd rather give up art.

Actually this is a false. If we legalized piracy, a lot of people would still pay because like me, they'd understand it's important to support artists if we want them to make art. And some artists would find other ways to make money with their music, for example by selling t-shirts and doing concerts. Artists might earn less money, but I don't think they'd all go bankrupt. Art would remain alive and well.

Again, I value my freedom, rights and privacy much more. I'd rather legalize piracy than make those sacrifices. I wish I could stay in the middle, but the battle between pirates and music industry keeps on going and those of us who don't want to take sides are caught in the crossfire. Are rights are taken away one by one.
So I think the sooner the battle ends, the better it will be for us. And so I feel I need to pick a side to make it end faster, and I choose pirates because again, I'm not willing to make the sacrifices the music industry is demanding.
Sorry music industry, but that's what you get when you decide to be a dick to everyone.

Re:Darknets

[AngryDeuce]

Then they start rebooting/remaking everything.

Re:Darknets

[Anonymous Coward]

I sent this:

Un. Fucking. Believable. That pro-music site is registered by the IFPI, and therefore the MAFIAA.
http://who.is/whois/pro-music.org/

Regarding the Domain Seziure at http://rnbxclusive.com/,

This is a complaint about whatever SOCA officer decided acting as a personal enforcer for the IFPI and RIAA was a remotely reasonable use of taxpayer’s dollars. I honestly don’t expect you to take this email seriously, but hey, miracles happen.

I am a Canadian Citizen. You are a British agency, and apparently logging information about my visit to that site and threatening prosecution, an unlimited fine and a 10 year prison sentence. . I have never been to this site before. I saw a news article about the seizure and clicked on a link. I am not happy to see your agency is logging (read spying) on other countries citizens.

I have a strong ethical issue with the notices on that site, so much so that I’ve wasted twenty minutes of my life to tell you how I feel.

The line “As a result of illegal downloads young, emerging artists may have had their careers damaged” That statement is anecdotal at best, and an outright lie at worst. The fact that you link to a page(pro-music) who’s whois information lists ross@ifpi.org as a tech and admin contact absolutely disgusts me. The IFPI, as I’m sure you’re aware is a global front for the RIAA. Has Sony, Warner, etc under guise of RIAA and IFPI bought out the British government too? See here for a list of RIAA members: http://www.riaa.com/aboutus.php?content_selector=who_we_are_board.

A government agency should absolutely not be promoting a private corporation in any way shape or form. To imply the only way to get “legal” music is from IFPI members is not only extremely dishonest, but completely untrue.

I think a few things need clarified about the nature of computerized data. Data is not “stolen,” it is copied. No physical or tangible object is taken, the owner is not deprived of anything. If anything it would be a copyright issue, which is a civil issue not criminal. Unfortunately the RIAA and IFPI have decided it’s a better strategy to litigate rather than innovate.

What these sentences imply is that it’s more damaging to society to download a copy of a copyrighted song than walking up to a random stranger and beaning them in the head with a baseball bat (a cricket bat for you English folks). I’m not well versed in British law, but in Canada at least it’s only a two year maximum for assault with a weapon.

But honestly, good luck with your “unlimited fines” and outrageous prison sentences. I’m sure any well informed member of the public appreciates your agency’s dedication to Corporate America.

Last but not least, a right-justified page, really??

Sincerely,

A pissed off Canadian.

Re:Darknets

[icebraining]

Studies show that pirates pay (and often pay a lot) for songs too. The dichotomy (pirate, buyer) doesn't exist.

Re:Darknets

[AngryDeuce]

After buying tons of CDs where it was obvious that the production quality was vastly different on the radio singles compared to the rest of the $20-fucking-dollar CDs a lot of the time (especially bad during the 90's), when Napster came around, I was done throwing money at the record industry.

That's not to say I don't support artists, I just refuse to give them money through their label. I've gone to many live shows, bought a lot of merchandise, even donated directly to some. I'll support an artist in any way that is possible without some Record Industry vampire fuck standing in between us.

Granted, my musical tastes have completely changed and I listen to very little major label music anymore, and thanks to the internet, there are tons of people out there giving great music away completely for free; you have to wade through some shit to find it, but then again, most of the stuff coming out of major labels these days is shit anyway. The RIAA is quickly becoming irrelevant, not because of piracy, but because artists don't need them anymore. People are getting huge online due to word of mouth. A friend forwarded me a video of a duo doing a cover of a Chris Brown song 9 months or so ago, and they were the musical guests on Saturday Night Live this past weekend. In less than a year they've gone from Youtube to NBC...it's not really my kind of music but it's impressive regardless.

Humanity was making music for thousands of years before the concept of a fucking record label even existed. I have a feeling that people will continue to make music long after they're gone. The only people terrified of a MAFIAA-less future is the MAFIAA itself.

Re:Darknets

[fatman22]

"We do our utmost to provide the public with the best possible service, and to act professionally and courteously at all times."

I beg to disagree with you. Have you read the nonsense on that replacement web page?

"... were stolen from the artists" - nothing was stolen. The authors and publishers still have possession of their property. They were only deprived of profits they had not yet earned. That is not a proper thing to do, but it is also not stealing. Change the text to read "were being distributed without the owners' permission".

"As a result of ... young, emerging artists may have had their careers damaged. If you have ... you will have damaged the future of the music industry." - The publishers have done far more to ruin or hinder the careers of young emerging artists than any illegal downloaders could have caused. Aim your sites in the right direction please.

Most of the Internet community already understand this. You apparently do not or do not want to. Do your credibility a favor and reword that page.

Re:Darknets

[gnasher719]

"... were stolen from the artists" - nothing was stolen. The authors and publishers still have possession of their property. .

No, they don't. They have possession of _one_ copy. They have lost possession of all the other copies. If you make a copy illegally, then it is not your property. It is the property of the copyright holder. This would be similar to "borrowing" a cow, using it to produce calves, then returning the cow and keeping the calves.

Re:Darknets

[Thing 1]

This would be similar to "borrowing" a cow, using it to produce calves, then returning the cow and keeping the calves.

No. It's not like taking livestock and forcing them to reproduce and keeping the offspring. Unfortunately, it's not like anything we've experienced in the real world. It's making a copy, and not depriving the owner of any part of their property, including the temporary ability for their property to create offspring. It's completely different. There is no car analogy (apart from "you wouldn't download and copy this car" -- but you would; otherwise, you would be operating at a non-optimal efficiency, and who but the masters would want that in the general public?!!?!?).

Re:Darknets

[gnasher719]

I understand your offense but I wonder if anyone has considered that this whole thing could be a hoax.

A Google search for the site name shows that it comes up with search results for "free mp3 files" with music that is most likely not there legally (assuming that Kanye West and Lady Gaga haven't given them permission to distribute their music for free). So the site is real; and it doesn't make "free mp3 files" available anymore.

Three possibilities: 1. The site owner made a very strange joke. 2. Some hacker has taken over the site. 3. It's real. Which one? You decide.

Re:Darknets

[SuperTechnoNerd]

"I'm anti-piracy, I'm one of those weirdos who thinks artists deserve to get money for what they produce"

It's not about piracy, it's about control. I think that has become quite clear.

Re:Darknets

[sjames]

Yes, but how can I write a song with "purple monkey dishwasher"?

The number of meaningful combinations is somewhat smaller and the ones that make good lyrics smaller still.

As for music, I hear a lot of similarities in a lot of music now. Some of it below the threshold that seems to trigger a lawsuit, some above but apparently unnoticed. I doubt any of them are actual copying vs just being the result of a similar process and intent.

Re:Darknets

[tftp]

"Your Browser: Mozilla10" There is no such browser!

I'm running 11.0 and an update is ready. The 10.x certainly exists.

Re:Darknets

[Zontar The Mindless]

I'm a pissed-off American, so I'll go with a cheery Track THIS! from a real American hero. :)

Re:Darknets

[Lost Race]

There's no way any plugin can hide your actual IP address from whatever HTTP server you connect to. Remote anonymizing proxy, yes; plugin, no.

Re:Darknets

[SuperTechnoNerd]

I'm using Mosaic from 1993 works great..

Re:Darknets

[SuperTechnoNerd]

"these gullible idiots "

And they are PROUD of it to.

I think it's the latest fad..

Re:Darknets

[bl968]

Yeah, well I noticed the U.K. serious sissy patrol neglected to leave any contact information so I could ridicule them about tracking me and offer them a taste of my stool. Common tactic.

add ?insert_profane_comment_here to the end of the url. It will be logged and if they try to do anything with the logs it will show up.

IE: http://rnbxclusive.com/?insert_profane_comment_here

Re:Darknets

[Baseclass]

The site dates back to 2008.

Re:Darknets

[Anonymous Coward]

Genius... done!

Re:Darknets

[tbird81]

The irony with this whol thing is I'm anti-piracy, I'm one of those weirdos who thinks artists deserve to get money for what they produce, however easy it is to copy bit for bit.

Well they don't deserve it. There's a law saying they should, but it's not inherently fair.

It's copying. It's not like they've got to stop what they're doing and perform the song everytime it pops up on someone's iPod!

They can accept money for performing. They can sell MP3s on their website. But there's no reason that they should be able to control what I do on my computer with my own data!

Re:Darknets

[mrmeval]

My rights are my own and no British fascist is above the primary law. Come find me you cowards.

Re:Darknets

[Anonymous Coward]

purple monkey dishwasher, why are you in my brain
have i gone insane or am i totally lame?
the answers to these questions are also filled with song
no need to sing along, sit right back and smoke that bong



that sounds a lot better than 99.9% of the top 40 garbage out here, man.

Re:Darknets

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm a bit of both, if that makes sense. I believe that artists should be compensated for their work, however I also see how the concept of copyright has been perverted into something that makes very little sense, to the point where congress now wants to take things in the public domain and "re-copyright" them. This stifles creative progress and brings the government into the realm of culture in a way that it never should.

At any rate, I think media companies (not artists themselves) are panicked at the thought of losing market control, which is why they are so worried about any alternative including piracy. They've had a great deal of control for so long and don't like the scale shifting in the favor of competition, so they will lobby government, even in ways that sound reasonable to ensure they can still dominate the emerging competition and try to shut down innovation that will force them to adapt.

Re:Darknets

[Anonymous Coward]

http://rnbxclusive.com/Hey_what_haapened_to_the_sun_never_sets_on_us_bad_teeth_limey_bastards

Re:Darknets

[Anonymous Coward]

It's much more like, not borrowing or even touching the cow and creating an exact duplicate of the cow with no cost in energy or resources for the owner of the first cow.

Re:Darknets

[TapeCutter]

I'm a pissed-off American

Is there any other kind these days?

Re:Darknets

[TapeCutter]

Yes, but how can I write a song with "purple monkey dishwasher"?

Talent! - The Beatles managed to get 'custard', 'walrus', and 'egg-man' all into one song.

Re:Darknets

[Znork]

No. The easiest way to demonstrate why is to examine what happens to the copies when copyright expires. There is no transfer of property at that point. The copies are and have always been the property of their respective possessor.

The monopoly right is more like a taxation right on the act of copying.

Calling it 'property' and trying to think about it as 'property' inevitably muddies your thinking. Which was the whole point of trying to call it 'property' in the first place.

Re:Darknets

[azalin]

Did you listen any currently popular lyrics? It's not like many of them really need more than 5 different words anyway.

Re:Darknets

[Znork]

Due to the corruptive nature of copyright I regard it as unethical to give any money to the industry. While I support independent productions, I regard anything that starves the corrupting agencies of funding as a positive thing; intellectual monopoly laws have to go, the rent seeking that damages freedom of speech and free markets follows naturally by the nature of the laws.

Of course there are other ways to ensure extra funding for creative endeavours that don't have the built-in flaws of the monopoly systems.

But until then, depriving the industry of money is one of the better ways to reduce their ability to buy legislation.

Re:Darknets

[Builder]

I just sent the following complaint to the ipcc

---
To whom it may concern,

As part of reading an article on the efforts to reduce music piracy, I visited http://rnbxclusive.com/

The message on this page advises "The above information can be used to identify you and your location. " It goes on to say

"SOCA has the capability to monitor and investigate you, and can inform your internet service provider of these infringements.
You may be liable for prosecution and the fact that you have received this message does not preclude you from prosecution."

This is completely heavy handed abuse by a police organisation. I should not be threatened with tracking and prosecution merely for visiting a web site from a news article. Please can you investigate why I have been threatened in this manner for simply following a link from a legitimate news website.
---

Flood them with similar complaints and maybe someone will get a talking to :)

Re:Darknets

[Anonymous Coward]

Nice suggestion. I tried using the following: http://www.soca.gov.uk/search?q=free+mp3s&option=com_googlemini

Re:Darknets

[u38cg]

Personally, I find it highly offensive that they used a fixed width layout.

Re:Darknets

[TapeCutter]

Encryption. All roads lead to it. It will either be controlled, which means freedom died, or it will remain uncontrolled, and enable freedom to survive.

Encryption has only recently become "uncontrolled", 20yrs ago encryption was regarded by law as a munition in most western countries, there were severe legal restrictions, (up to and including treason), for the unauthorised dissemination of encryption technology.

So if you want to equate access to encryption technology with freedom, then you should be applauding western governments*, for significantly broadening your freedoms wrt encryption over the last 2-3 decades, not hanging them for YOUR irrational gut feeling of what they might do in the future.

Of course these days it's highly fashionable to claim (with a straight face) that the primary long term goal of democratic governments is to take away your freedom and that their every (in)action is proof of said goal. Which explains why your +5 Paranoia post is currently rated as +5 Insightful, despite the fact that it's built on an historical straw man and concludes the exact opposite to what their track record over the last 20yrs would strongly suggest. How deep does this popular rabbit hole go? - Can we use the 'failure' of government to restrict freedoms in this case as yet more proof that governments can't do anything right?

One question though. - If governments can't do anything right, how can they possibly achieve the Dr Evil style goals you ascribe to them?

* - Not forgetting the privacy activists, banks, and pornographers who prodded their respective governments to release the military choke-hold on the technology. Also many of the laws may still be on the books because it's often more politically expedient to have a policy of ignoring certain laws rather than trying to change them.

Re:Darknets

[Boscrossos]

I find it funny that the same people here on slashdot who complain about music copyright being ridiculous, and that they just copy at no cost to anyone, are also those who complain that China is stealing our ideas and IP, and copying everything. The theory is the same. You get to use something you were not meant to use without remuneration for its creator.

Could they do stuff differently? Sure. But for the moment, the holder of the copyright can decide how he spreads his product, and it is not up to you to decide that he should give it away for free. If he chooses to do so (and many bands do), great. If not, then you'll just have to pay to enjoy his product. If you don't, you are breaking a law. Maybe not "thou shalt not steal", but a law nonetheless. And you are taking away from the producer the right to spread his product as he sees fit.

Re:Darknets

[Boscrossos]

Why should the International Panel on Climate Change care about our online rights?

Re:Darknets

[Boscrossos]

Links or it didn't happen.

Re:Darknets

[icebraining]

First I could find, but there are more: Study finds pirates 10 times more likely to buy music.

Oh, and allow me to point out:

Wisely, the study did not rely on music pirates' honesty. Researchers asked music buyers to prove that they had proof of purchase.

Re:Darknets

[Anonymous Coward]

err... they don't actually pay the upcoming star $100,00 for a year... its called an "advance" and that money would be spent on production (studio time / musicians / song writers ) and promotion (travel / hotels / record company execs / record company promos / in store posters / record company execs / pre-release cd's for radio stations / record company spruikers / music video / record company execs ). It's really just a loan. The artist see'd none of it.

As part of the advance the record company usually then own the copyright to the work (because they contracted the star to perform it for them).

The reason the record companies give advances is they then charge interest and fees on top of that (remember most of that money was spent by the record company doing things in house). Then with every sale the record company repays the advance (and charges more management fees on top for accounting). A tiny portion of what is left makes its way to the artist in cash.

The best part of it is, if that upcoming star becomes popular and tours, the record company still gets a cut as they own the copyright (just like a musical licenses its songs/music from the original writers).

Believe me an artist never really wants an advance - a up coming start can be extinguished with the debt. I have a friend who sold over 100,000 albums and ended up with $1,000,000 debt to the record companies and is still touring 4 years later trying to make any money.

Re:Darknets

[Anonymous Coward]

That wasn't pay, it was an advance. The vast majority of artists fail to take off, and end up with a debt to the record company.

Re:Darknets

[bWareiWare.co.uk]

What if the plugin redirected your trafic though a remote anonymizing proxy?

Re:Darknets

[queBurro]

you're not weird, I'm with you, but when does my Biggles collection come out of copyright? the author's been dead 40 years and the books are up to 80 years old

Re:Darknets

[Anonymous Coward]

Of course it's a fucking hoax. Maybe if all these nutjobs go to the darknets we can stop seeing bullshit like this.

The Serious Organized Crime Agency would not witter on about the rights of young musicians on a takedown page.

Jesus, people.

Re:Darknets

[flyneye]

Thanks,that was fun...

Re:Darknets

[Anonymous Coward]

A nice thought, but the problem lies in the fact that it isn't just a single generation soaked with this particular poison.

If it were just a matter of waiting until Orrin Hatch died off, that would be easy. OTOH, the MPAA and RIAA likely employs an awful lot of 30-somethings

Hi there. It was us 30-somethings who got the ball rolling with digital music, MP3s, etc. Napster, anyone?

Re:Darknets

[xaxa]

Additionally, the WHOIS data still records an individual (not SOCA) as owning the domain.

My guess is they've arrested him, seized the servers, and installed their own server instead to respond. The web page is stupid, and the claims it makes should be criticised, but arresting the guy and seizing the servers as evidence is exactly what they should do.

Re:Darknets

[heathen_01]

King Diarmait disagrees with you.

Re:Darknets

[AmiMoJo]

I'm drafting a similar complain, but will focus on the blatant lies and scaremongering.

They say you can get 10 years for downloading music. That is a lie. It is copyright infringement, a civil matter, no jail time possible unless you start doing it on a commercial scale for profit. They say they can identify and track you from an IP address. That is also a lie, IP addresses do not identify individuals, computers or even internet connections.

They also make a big deal out of how the operators were arrested for fraud. Arrested, not even charged yet? Convicted? Maybe they are innocent. I might as well shout from the rooftops about how SOCA are all murderers and terrorists. Accusations are meaningless until proven in court and a law enforcement agency, of all people, should not try to make out otherwise.

Re:Darknets

[Anonymous Coward]

You coulda got a +5 Funny if only you posted as AC.

Re:Darknets

[sjames]

True, but that further limits the useful combinations.

Re:Darknets

[jonbryce]

Independent Police Complaints Commission.

You have to complain to the relevant police department first, in this case SOCA, and be dissatisfied with their response before you can take it to the IPCC.

Be warned though that complaining to the IPCC is no more likely to change anything than complaining to Madame Tussauds.

Re:Darknets

[Anonymous Coward]

Report them to the European Court of Human Rights and the European Commission.

Re:Darknets

[Forty Two Tenfold]

I'm writing, but SOCA only gets the cc I send to UK embassy in my country. Track that, motherfuckers.

Re:Darknets

[Anonymous Coward]

I need to point out that artist that died such as Michael Jackson or the late Whitney Houston will not lose anything. Their estates MIGHT, but that is not the artist.

Re:Darknets

[Anonymous Coward]

Alright, thanks. I stand corrected.

Re:Darknets

[Anonymous Coward]

The Nazis used the same tactics. These guys may nt be Nazis by name, but they certainly are in practice.

Perhaps they all need to simply be told that they need to choose a side. If they choose the side of freedom and the people then they should abandon their post. Anybody that fails to abandon their post are supporting power grabs, and those assault directly on freedom, and so they have choosen their side.

Re:Darknets

[Anonymous Coward]

I fear things have gone too far already that peaceful solution may not have any chance of success. However, I dont think wild civil unrest is going to work either. A lot of people have begun suggesting surgical actions of which they have not been clear. However, I believe they are talking about taking out those that are in charge.

I hope things do not degrade any further, but all indications are the powers at the top are doing everything in their power to make this all happen. This all started when laws were passed giving more authority and control in favor of big business. It is proof that power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.

Re:Darknets

[Zoxed]

>> Didn't work for me. My operating system came out as "unknown", despite being bog-standard Safari on a Mac running Snow Leopard.

> These guys are into Serious crime. They don't want to deal with small volume, unknown Operating Systems run by petty criminals.

But surely an Apple OS *is* a serious crime :-)

Re:Darknets

[LifesABeach]

So, "Serious Organized Crime Agency?!" And I thought a government department named, "Home Land Security" sounded gay. Who thinks of these names? John Stewart?

Re:Darknets

[tehcyder]

The irony with this whol thing is I'm anti-piracy, I'm one of those weirdos who thinks artists deserve to get money for what they produce, however easy it is to copy bit for bit. But that SOCA message strikes me offensive and wildly accusatory that I'm starting to think my anti-piracy crusade needs to go on the back burner while I deal with the important thing, keeping the internet free.

I rather agree with you. I've always find the pro-piracy arguments somewhat tenuous, but this is just absolute madness. The Serious Organised Crime Agency is concerning itself with non-commercial copyright infringement? Silly me, I assumed they dealt with acrual organised crime, gangsters and so on.

Re:Darknets

[g0bshiTe]

I'm anti-piracy, I'm one of those weirdos who thinks artists deserve to get money for what they produce,

I wouldn't say I'm anti-piracy per se, but I have been known to download cracked things on a trial basis, if I decide to keep I show my support and purchase, if not I delete all relevant files and never look back. I'm also all for artists getting paid, but what you fail to realize is how little artist actually receive.

Citation: http://www.variety.com/article/VR1118049716

So by this formula, it would appear that piracy does indeed affect the artist, but more-so affects the label. I've no problem with a label not getting paid.

Re:Darknets

[g0bshiTe]

-1000 Geek points for not knowing how to contact them.

If they are tracking your IP by visiting they may be gathering UserAgent data as well, just change your UserAgent to something like FUCK SOCA.

Re:Darknets

[Grishnakh]

No, you need eleven proxies. For that extra push over the cliff.

Re:Darknets

[g0bshiTe]

And you are taking away from the producer the right to spread his product as he sees fit.

I have no issue with this, it's the artists I'd prefer got paid.

Re:Darknets

[kilfarsnar]

We had music before the days of big corporations, and we'll still have music if they go.

This is what everyone needs to keep in mind. Thanks!

Re:Darknets

[g0bshiTe]

You mention that yet leave out that the hook was "goo goo g'joob".

Re:Darknets

[g0bshiTe]

Put that to a 1-4-5 chord progression with the chorus on the relative minor and it's a guaranteed hit. At least that's what I think the current formula follows.

Re:Darknets

[tehcyder]

There is no car analogy

There is always a car analogy!

The closest car analogy would be if Ford developed a new car and you copied the plans and built an exact replica yourself instead of buying one from them, and they sued you for the profit from the lost sale.

It would be a slightly better analogy if you were a criminal gang and sold counterfeit Ford cars, but for individuals it is indeed inadequate.

Re:Darknets

[g0bshiTe]

$100,000 a year I doubt, possibly 10k a year. The rest would be in the form of a label supplied dwelling, and vehicle. Both of which cost the label far less to provide as they own them then to pay the artist that sum per year. If things didn't work out, the label kicks out the artist. I've no citation for this theory, but it makes sense from a business perspective. Why pay them an exorbitant amount when you can pay them that on paper and put them up in a house the label owns then deduct that from the amount they earn. Bait and switch.

Re:Darknets

[Naurgrim]

Well, I'm drunk, so I tracked down this email address: publiccomplaints@soca.x.gsi.gov.uk and sent them a note protesting their legal threats for just visiting a website for the first time in my life and asking them to send an agent to track me down here in the US. Of course, any agent they send to my home will be welcomed by me, my dogs and my Second Amendment rights.

Re:Darknets

[Naurgrim]

Hoorah! You voiced it more eloquently than I did up-thread, I agree completely.

Re:Darknets

[EdIII]

not hanging them for YOUR irrational gut feeling of what they might do in the future.

Uh huhhh.

Let me seee.....

Clipper Chip. Echelon. Carnivore. Proposals for Key Escrow....

You're right. I'm being paranoid and unfair. Government has made no moves whatsoever to control encryption, which is to control and monitor communications.

None. Thank You. I am taking down the Tin Foil defenses and going to see the sun again today.

Re:Darknets

[The_Wilschon]

Hmm. You could leave burma shave messages in their httpd logs.

http://mbxclusive.com/SOCA_are_wankers

http://mbxclusive.com/in_the_pocket

http://mbxclusive.com/of_the_IFPI

http://mbxclusive.com/Burma_shave

Re:Darknets

[Anonymous Coward]

You are not weird.
I want to pay the artists, but not the middle men threatening me with allsorts if I don't, offering the artists 1-2%, at best, of what i pay.

I pay for software I use. I pay willingly for things that I keep using.
A track being cheap on iTunes? Well, again, why should I pay even a $/£/€ for something that the artist gets a fraction of a 1c for?
I download because they don't make tv series or movies available to watch or buy where i am.

Make it available, at fair play terms, with a fair and reasonable share of the payment for the artists, and I will pay for what I use. Not a problem.

Re:Darknets

[Chrisje]

I have 1200+ proofs of purchase standing in a CD cabinet in my living room. When I try to rip those CD's to 320 MP3 (yeah, yeah, go ahead... hit me with the AAC, OGG or FLAC arguments), quite a few of them fail for having developed read problems while standing in my cabinet.

Since I will not invest this money again, I will simply download a FLAC version and convert it, or find a decent 320 rip which I will then tag, supply with cover art and import to iTunes. I only have 400+ albums to go out of my collection, because 700+ are already of said quality by now. The rest is sub-320 Mp3. Don't ask... storage *was* more expensive at some point in time, you know. If they come knocking, I would be delighted to go through my record collection with any interested party. ;)

My point here is that I might be seen as a pirate too because of my downloading behaviour. However, I'm just creating a much needed backup copy for information I have purchased on a physical media. I find the moniker "pirate" somewhat offensive for someone who has put as much effort and money into a music collection as I have.

Re:Darknets

[nbauman]

I'm basing that on a story the Wall Street Journal ran a few years ago profiling an Irish singer who moved to California (I think LA) while under contract to one of the record companies.

They thought she had potential, they produced one record, then another, they sold OK but not well, they kept changing the formula, and the understanding was that if she didn't get at least a modest hit they would drop her. It was a good business story.

Unfortunately I can't cite it or look it up, so I'm recalling from memory. I could be wrong. It sounded like they were investing about $100,000 a year, including the apartment and the car.

But my original point is that the record companies do invest in singers. It's more than just recording studios and platters, it's marketing and development of new talent.

However, would we have good music anyway even without the record companies? I think so.

Re:Darknets

[History's Coming To]

I had a go at this once - within the realistic boundaries of human hearing and western musical composition, and using Meatloaf's "Bat Out Of Hell" as the benchmark for the longest son allowed, we have approximately 10^1643 times the current age of the universe before it runs out. (Wildly hand wavy figure, it's just a Fermi problem)
The Day The Music Dies

Re:Darknets

[History's Coming To]

Good point, but the artist is allowed to sell the rights to a second party within their lifetime. It's called a record deal. Until recently (the advent of broadband essentially) that was the only way an artist could make significant amounts of money from recording rather than live performance.

Re:Darknets

[lsatenstein]

The RIAA wants to be treated as patent holders. Every music release is a patent, and forget copyrights. Just look at the patent laws now, and think about letting the RIAA take hold of the net. They will certainly make it illegal for any composer to post his music on the net, without RIAA dues. (Sounds almost like the RIAA is a Union house).

Re:Darknets

[icebraining]

Well, if you just download it, that's fine, but if you're using Bittorrent, they still have a case against you for uploading.

Re:Darknets

[Clifton Beach]

Unfortunately it's not a hoax. It is confirmed on the SOCA web site.

Re:Darknets

[Lost Race]

What if the plugin redirected your trafic though a remote anonymizing proxy?

Then the proxy would hide your IP address.

GGP wrote:

All works fine, which IP address would they like me to come from?

The server gets the proxy's actual IP address, not "which IP address would they like". Perhaps some proxies can be instructed to send a bogus X-Forwarded-For HTTP header, but anyone who analyzes server logs knows enough to be skeptical of that header.

Maybe GGP's plugin sends a bogus X-Forwarded-For header itself, and counts on all server operators to be grossly incompetent and ignore the actual client address. That actually sounds like the right level of "hacking" expertise for the typical Anonymous cannon fodder.

Re:Darknets

[Thing 1]

To respond to your signature, and stay on-topic: to make doing a thing illegal, does not make it wrong to do it (or, the title of the book I read recently, "It's Dangerous to be Right When the Government is Wrong").

And, I somewhat disagree with your car analogy, merely because "[you] built an exact replica yourself" would take some time and resources. Making a copy of a song/movie takes significantly less time and resources (not zero, but approaching negligible).

Re:Darknets

[TapeCutter]

Yes, apologies for the tragic omission.

Re:Darknets

[Anonymous Coward]

I know it's not currently applicable to the site in the article because the operator is under arrest, but if anyone ever seizes your site like, just contact your registrar and have them change your domain to "parked" status.

Re:Darknets

[xenobyte]

And when they find something really bad, they create "The Really Serious Organized Crime Agency"... Yes, we're serious and this time we really, really, really mean it!

Re:Darknets

[Anonymous Coward]

You believe an artist should be compensated for their work? How much compensation is enough, do you think? £10 million? £20 million? £50 million? £100 million?

Engineers, computer programmers, surgeons, paramedics, sweatshop workers, etc., etc., all work very hard, much harder than pop musicians (and their work is more valuable), yet they get paid a SALARY, NOT royalties that turn them into multi-millionaires - i.e. they can't just sit on their backside and wait for the money to pour in - neither do they get the world and his wife babbling on about their need to be rewarded.

How about rewarding, say, those who assemble Apple's iPhone and iPads - or is theft of people's labour and lives perfectly acceptable to you? Sweatshops do NOT develop a country's economy because the people never earn enough to stimulate domestic demand - it's pure exploitation! And, to my mind at least, it's also a SERIOUS CRIME.

Tee-hee

[Anonymous Coward]

Does anyone else giggle when they read "Serious Organized Crime Agency" with a deep voice?

Re:Tee-hee

[ColdWetDog]

Does anyone else giggle when they read "Serious Organized Crime Agency" with a deep voice?

Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition!

Re:Tee-hee

[Hoi Polloi]

Sounds like something a 10 year old came up with. "I'm the head of the Very Important Government Stuff!!"

Re:Tee-hee

[pinfall]

If only some python-esque troop would come to our rescue and mock these ludicrous web police into a stupor.
That's not funny! Enough of that!

Re:Tee-hee

[Anonymous Coward]

oo oo oo *jumps up and down* and the law and order sound at the end, too!

Re:Tee-hee

[clarkkent09]

Well they have to somehow distinguish themselves from the "Just For Laughs Organized Crimes Agency"

Re:Tee-hee

[AaronLS]

They would be arrested and tried for copying the ideas of Monty Python.

Re:Tee-hee

[wbr1]

Their office is next door to the Ministry of Funny Walks.

Re:Tee-hee

[interkin3tic]

I read "SOPA" first. It was like in some horror movie where toward the end, the bad guy stands up, and the good guy is like "YOU!?!? BUT... BUT WE KILLED YOU!!!! NOOOOOOOOOOOoh wait, my mistake, I thought you were someone else. Sorry."

Re:Tee-hee

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't giggle because I am a guy.

I do laugh, though.

Re:Tee-hee

[nbauman]

Apparently there really is a country like that. Monty Python didn't make it up.

Re:Tee-hee

[greycortex]

I love the graphic of the puma attacking the globe. That's a serious attack puma!

Re:Tee-hee

[Cimexus]

It's more likely to be a lion, given that the lion is a traditional symbol of Britain.

Re:Tee-hee

[Anonymous Coward]

As HIGNFY commented yesterday, this is an upgrade to the previous incarnation, the Frivolous Organised Crime Agency.

Re:Tee-hee

[Anonymous Coward]

Like as in, opposed to the "Totally Frivolous Organized Crime Agency" ?
Or the "Seriously Disorganised Crime Agency" ?

But I don't get it - I mean, in the end, what does a seriously organised criminal need an agent for anyway, and why is gummint offering the services?

Completely baffled....

Re:Tee-hee

[Anonymous Coward]

Does anyone else giggle when they read "Serious Organized Crime Agency" with a deep voice?

Does that mean they have a Light-hearted Organized Crime Agency?
Also LOCA sounds like it would be more effective.

Re:Tee-hee

[Phreakiture]

Nah, I just used my UserAgent string to tell them they are a bunch of fucking wankers.

I know they're just trying to strike fear into the hearts of pirates everywhere, but the truth is that I, along with probably every Slashdotter, know these tricks and may have even implemented the same ourselves at one point or another. I suggest that we just give them so much garbage traffic that they can't use their logs.

Re:Tee-hee

[Anonymous Coward]

I would also point out that the giggling continues when you read the text in red..

If you have downloaded music using this website you may have committed a criminal offence which carries a maximum penalty of up to 10 years imprisonment and an unlimited fine under UK law. ...And an unlimited fine...

Unlimited fine... unlimited fine... Isn't that worse than any ludicrous RIAA lawsuits against grandmothers and unborn children we saw in the US these past few years?

Re:Tee-hee

[Zaiff Urgulbunger]

It's worse than that though because the Serious Organised Crime Agency sounds like a rogue group of criminals; all they need is the strap-line "Because Serious Crime is Serious Business"! And a cat as their logo.... oh wait, they've already got that.

Re:Tee-hee

[Taibhsear]

Serious Organized Crime Agency is serious.

Re:Tee-hee

[MarkGriz]

Sounds like a name that organized criminals would used, not someone fighting organized crime.

Upon further reflection, the name is fitting.

Re:Tee-hee

[Anonymous Coward]

I even thought it was fake because the logo and name of the agency were so terrible.
Then I realized that it was a real logo of a government agency and I felt sad for them.

Thanks SOCA

[viperidaenz]

for assuming you have jurisdiction in my country.

"About SOCA"

SOCA tackles serious organised crime that affects the UK and our citizens. This includes Class A drugs, people smuggling and human trafficking, major gun crime, fraud, computer crime and money laundering. and downloading american music

ftfy.

Re:Thanks SOCA

[Foxhoundz]

for assuming you have jurisdiction in my country.

What makes you think they can't request your government to extradite you?

Re:Thanks SOCA

[lightknight]

I'm going to go out on a limb here and say the crime did not occur on American soil?

Re:Thanks SOCA

[Anonymous Coward]

are you sure you understand what 'extradition' means?

Re:Thanks SOCA

[jamstar7]

Like that ever stopped the MAFIAA before. Get accused of downloading any American 'intellectual property' anywhere on the planet and expect to get put on a 'deport to the US please' list forwarded to your local national government.

I'm thinkin mebbe we oughta move offplanet, make it more expensive to come after us...

Re:Thanks SOCA

[viperidaenz]

They're having a hard enough time extraditing Kim Dotcom

Re:Thanks SOCA

[clarkkent09]

I'm thinkin mebbe we oughta move offplanet, make it more expensive to come after us...

Yep, either that or buy your music, whatever's easier.

Re:Thanks SOCA

[Anonymous Coward]

If it's downloading American music, I can only conclude that the fraudulent act being investigated is Auto-Tuned music.

Thank you SOCA. Carry on the good work.

Re:Thanks SOCA

[Kalriath]

They still haven't even filed the request to do so. And they have only until March 3 to do that.

Re:Thanks SOCA

[Anonymous Coward]

It certainly is easier to set precedence for international law. I imagine you might be more upset if the cops showed up at your house to arrest you because China accused you of something. There seems to be a Think of the music tone to support these actions.

Re:Thanks SOCA

[Anonymous Coward]

Hmm, an American ranting about a foreign country messing in US affairs. What sweet irony!

Re:Thanks SOCA

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm sure the National government would ignore that time limitation. It is, after all, for people who work hard to publish something made by someone else.

It's not like they've been honest about anything else.

Re:Thanks SOCA

[whoever57]

They still haven't even filed the request to do so. And they have only until March 3 to do that.

"They" don't care. His business is irretrievably destroyed. The original objective has been achieved.

Re:Thanks SOCA

[Anonymous Coward]

...thocka.

Re:Thanks SOCA

[xaxa]

for assuming you have jurisdiction in my country.

traceroute -T rnbxclusive.com
traceroute to rnbxclusive.com (83.138.166.114), 30 hops max, 60 byte packets
  1 192.168.1.254 (192.168.1.254) 3.944 ms 3.803 ms 3.698 ms
  2 * * *
  3 * * *
  4 linx.edge1.lon.rackspace.net (195.66.226.116) 32.608 ms 33.136 ms 33.262 ms
  5 vl911.core5a.lon3.rackspace.net (92.52.76.203) 34.481 ms vl912.core5a.lon3.rackspace.net (92.52.76.245) 35.372 ms vl911.core5a.lon3.rackspace.net (92.52.76.203) 35.897 ms
  6 aggr310a-core5a.lon3.rackspace.net (92.52.76.111) 36.828 ms 33.412 ms 33.855 ms
  7 S82574.clubonside.dk (83.138.166.114) 20.927 ms 24.706 ms 24.217 ms

It seems to me they haven't seized the domain at all. They've seized a server from Rackspace in London, and arrested the person who owned it. That seems fine.

I'd question the web page they've put up instead -- not in principle, just the incorrect claims and excessive hyperbole.

Serious Organized Crime Agency

[microbee]

One wonders what that means: is it an agency against serious organized crime, or is one to commit the crime itself?

Re:Serious Organized Crime Agency

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm not sure, but it's the latest revision of the Organised Crime Agency. The last one kept goofing off all the time.

Re:Serious Organized Crime Agency

[networkBoy]

That's because they used to be under the umbrella of the ministry of silly walks, but they have since been re-chartered under the MOD.
-nB

Re:Serious Organized Crime Agency

[Anonymous Coward]

Anyway now they're collecting tons of IP-addresses of Slashdotters who can't resist to click on links.

Slashdotters? Reading anything past TFS, let alone TFA or links contained therein?

Thanks, man, I needed a good laugh like that.

Re:Serious Organized Crime Agency

[jamstar7]

Like there's a difference these days?

Re:Serious Organized Crime Agency

[Anonymous Coward]

Have you received correspondence purporting to be from SOCA and want to verify its authenticity?
http://www.soca.gov.uk/contact-soca

Found two email addresses that could possible work.
publiccomplaints@soca.x.gsi.gov.uk
enquiries@ipcc.gsi.gov.uk

Re:Serious Organized Crime Agency

[Anonymous Coward]

Really, download music carries max penalty of 10 years? How about robbing people money?
How about police killing innocents? How about politicians misused public resources?
How about ... whatever, I was thinking what 'anonymous' is inappropiate and border line terrorists. But I think they might be right, with these kind of government, no government might be a better option.

Re:Serious Organized Crime Agency

[interkin3tic]

Quick, someone copyright "the No-shit-we-ain't-joking-around organized crime agency" so they'll have to buy it from you.

Re:Serious Organized Crime Agency

[Stoutlimb]

The penalties for copyright infringement are getting absurd, considering in British Columbia a guy who had a huge child porn collection got 3 years in prison. This despite the fact he was HIV positive and raped a 14 year old boy because he likes to spread the disease.

When stepping on the toes of those who buy politicians becomes the worst crime in the land, it's time to burn the whole system down and start from scratch.

Re:Serious Organized Crime Agency

[Anonymous Coward]

At first I actually thought that Serious Organized Crime Agency was a just a joke on the initials. It sounds like what what happens when you try to translate Chinese restaurant menus. The original title was probably "Serious Organized Crime With Joyful Agency Sauce" before they decided to shorten it a bit.

Re:Serious Organized Crime Agency

[Anonymous Coward]

They are the "gov'mint", the largest group of organized criminals in my country....

Re:Serious Organized Crime Agency

[Attila Dimedici]

One wonders what that means: is it an agency against serious organized crime, or is one to commit the crime itself?

It is an agency that licenses people to commit serious organized crime. If you do not have a license from this agency and you commit serious organized crime (such as pirating music. They are not interested in non-serious organized crime, such as murder) they will track you down and make you pay.

Re:Serious Organized Crime Agency

[Zaiff Urgulbunger]

The last one kept goofing off all the time.

Amusingly, that's true by their own admission if you listened to the hacked voice recording a week or two back!

Good luck

[Anonymous Coward]

it also shows the visitor's IP address, browser and operating system, and threatens to track and monitor them

Good luck with that - they just got Slashdotted!

Looks Fake

[Olipro]

whois indicates the original owner still controls the domain, the server itself is Rackspace owned whereas SOCA's own website is run themselves via Connect Internet Solutions Ltd. - throw in the fact that SOCA haven't made any announcement or press release regarding the alleged takedown and the whole thing looks like a setup, I call shenanigans.

Re:Looks Fake

[Anonymous Coward]

Looks Fake

No, it looks like exactly what I would expect from the dimwit that came up with the name "Serious Organized Crime Agency".

Re:Looks Fake

[Kalriath]

Actually, the server's hosted by Private Layer in Switzerland. But I still don't think this is actually seized by SOCA at all (especially since SOCA would have no jurisdiction to seize a domain held by Godaddy, an American company).

Re:Looks Fake

[Olipro]

according to a commenter elsewhere, they apparently phoned SOCA's press office and asserted it to be genuine, so, perhaps I stand corrected.

Re:Looks Fake

[Dan541]

It tells me that my Operating System is "NT" not specifically NT 6.1 or Win7 and my browser is "Desktop".

Re:Looks Fake

[Sarten-X]

My OS is Unknown, but my browser is also "Desktop". I guess an iPad could serve as a very small desk...

Re:Looks Fake

[realityimpaired]

To add to your suspicions... the blog in question is not one I've ever heard of. Now, I make no claims about being any sort of authority on the entire content of the Internet, but the first question that occurred to me on reading the summary was "does anybody here follow the blog in question, and if so, does it actually advocate piracy or promote the theft of property in any way?"

UK police are... special... at times. But they're not stupid. They wouldn't make a move against a website unless that website was actually doing something illegal. Coupled with your own information, I am now asking "is this an attempt to raise the profile of the blog, so that a few days from now when they are 'proven innocent', they'll have more hits?"

Re:Looks Fake

[whoever57]

Actually, the server's hosted by Private Layer in Switzerland.

Doesn't look like it to me. Looks like Rackspace in the UK:
traceroute to rnbxclusive.com (83.138.166.114), 30 hops max, 40 byte packets
....
4 nyk-b2-link.telia.net (213.248.83.105) 0.621 ms 0.601 ms 0.581 ms
5 nyk-bb2-link.telia.net (80.91.245.246) 0.560 ms 0.554 ms 0.537 ms
6 ldn-bb2-link.telia.net (213.248.65.93) 70.682 ms 70.634 ms 70.836 ms
7 ldn-b4-link.telia.net (80.91.251.13) 71.043 ms 71.016 ms 70.986 ms
8 rackspace-ic-132020-ldn-b4.c.telia.net (213.248.85.202) 72.684 ms 70.921 ms 71.109 ms
9 vl912.core5a.lon3.rackspace.net (92.52.76.245) 73.318 ms 73.291 ms vl911.core5a.lon3.rackspace.net (92.52.76.203) 73.002 ms
10 aggr310a-core5a.lon3.rackspace.net (92.52.76.111) 72.219 ms 71.905 ms 72.352 ms
11 S82574.clubonside.dk (83.138.166.114) 74.882 ms 75.357 ms 75.543 ms

# whois 83.138.166.114
...
% Information related to '83.138.166.64 - 83.138.166.127'
inetnum: 83.138.166.64 - 83.138.166.127
netname: RSPC-UK-RACKSPACE-INTERNAL
remarks:
descr: Rackspace Managed Hosting
country: GB
admin-c: IA247-RIPE

Re:Looks Fake

[scurvyj]

Yeah me too on second thought. In fact yeah, it absolutely is fake. Watch for snopes.

Re:Looks Fake

[Baseclass]

Your Browser: Firefox5.0

Almost had it, it is indeed a Mozilla based browser but not Firefox.

Your OS: WinNT

That's not even kinda close, Linux actually.

Are you fucking kidding me, these are supposed to be the enforcers of cyber crime?

Re:Looks Fake

[Dan541]

Wow, from Ubuntu it now tells me Firefox 7.0.1 on UNIX

It got the browser right however saying "UNIX" for operating system is far more inaccurate than saying "WinNT" for Windows 7.

Re:Looks Fake

[dadioflex]

There's weirder shit going down every day, but the lines about young artists having their careers ruined by illegal downloads, seems like a bold statement for normally bucolic UK police to make when nothing has yet been decided in a court of law. However, as I said weirder and weirder shit every day...

Re:Looks Fake

[AxeTheMax]

In my experience the British police are rarely bucolic [http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/bucolic]; in common with the rest of the population, most live and work in the cities.

Re:Looks Fake

[91degrees]

Does SOCA have a 24 hour press office?

Re:Looks Fake

[Anonymous Coward]

Sure; in the UK you just need to dial 999, it's a free call too.

Re:Looks Fake

[Cederic]

UK police are... special... at times. But they're not stupid. They wouldn't make a move against a website unless that website was actually doing something illegal.

Next you'll be telling me they'd never shoot an innocent Brazilian in the head 9 times on the tube.

If you suggest they wouldn't make a move against a website without a court order I'd still laugh at you. If you suggest they wouldn't seize a server without a court order I'd tend to agree - but I'd also point out that a court order is not an indication of guilt.

I've never been to that site and I don't know the content it used to host. I do think the SOCA statement is inflammatory, full of shit and based on music industry lies, and that means I also suspect the police acting on this case are also inflammatory, full of shit and perpetuating music industry lies.

That makes them stupid and/or corrupt, and libel laws prevent me claiming that they're corrupt.

Re:Looks Fake

[Kalriath]

Yeah, I get the feeling it's hopping around a lot. When I checked, it was marked as being in Switzerland, hosted by Private Layer Inc (which come to think of it is probably someone's private label offering - possibly even Rackspace)

Is that a real thing?

[mosb1000]

I can't believe there's actually a crime fighting organization called the Serious Organized Crime Agency. It's hard to imagine how they could have a sillier name, or who would feel threatened by something called that. Maybe they should upgrade it to the Super Serious Organized Crime Agency, or maybe even Super Serious Organized Crime Agency Plus.

Re:Is that a real thing?

[kurzweilfreak]

They were planning on adding the Plus to the upcoming Super Serious Organized Crime Agency name that they're about to put into effect, but their CEO, ManBearPig, said that was going a little over the top.

Re:Is that a real thing?

[Anonymous Coward]

How about Crime, Rackets and Associates Police? (CRAP for short)

Re:Is that a real thing?

[Anonymous Coward]

I certainly wouldn't cross the Soccer Organization of Charlottesville-Albemarle

Soccer moms by day.
Crime fighters by night.

Re:Is that a real thing?

[Anonymous Coward]

They probably don't want to get sued by Capcom for prefixing Super to a title. Or for appending actiony/emphasizingy words to a title.

Re:Is that a real thing?

[Anonymous Coward]

They're super serial, guys!

--
Al Gore

Re:Is that a real thing?

[AaronLS]

They are administered by Ministry of Silly walks.

In comedy: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IqhlQfXUk7w

In real life: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LZ0ue-XGl9c

Re:Is that a real thing?

[Hentes]

I would like to live in England if music piracy is the most serious crime over there.

Re:Is that a real thing?

[Oakey]

It's not that absurd as the entire point of SOCA is to go after 'serious organised crime', you know, the mafia types as opposed to your shoplifter types.

Re:Is that a real thing?

[Jay L]

They work with the SAS - that's Super Army Soldiers!

Re:Is that a real thing?

[Anonymous Coward]

It would be good if they went for the MAFIAA instead. ;)

Re:Is that a real thing?

[Anonymous Coward]

I can't believe there's actually a crime fighting organization called the Serious Organized Crime Agency

You obviously don't understand British culture.

I suggest you search the Pirate Bay with the term "Monty Python".

Re:Is that a real thing?

[Anonymous Coward]

Maybe they can take advice from Capcom and call it Super Serious Organized Crime Agency II Ex-2 Alpha Pro.

Re:Is that a real thing?

[Xest]

The real scandal is that they were set up to combat serious, organised crime, such as terrorism, and criminal gangs such as those involved in people trafficing, drugs smuggling and so forth.

Yet it appears they're now taking down MP3 sites.

I will be arranging to meet my MP at his next surgery and protesting very vocally to him in person about this blatant misappropriation of tax payer funds for something those funds were never intended for. Effectively we have this supposedly elite, extremely well funded group of police offers kitted out for dealing with the most serious of crimes, acting as mere sock puppets of the US content industry.

Re:Is that a real thing?

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, the UK has the Ministry of Silly Walks.

Re:Is that a real thing?

[Anonymous Coward]

It's not that absurd as the entire point of SOCA is to go after 'serious organised crime',

They don't look like to be going after organised crime. Instead, they are bullying unorganized visitors of a music blog on behalf of the largest crime syndicate of this age.

So their name is apt, they are actually supporting serious organized crime, since they are enforcing a copyright-based extortion racket.

Re:Is that a real thing?

[Anonymous Coward]

I can't believe there's actually a crime fighting organization called the Serious Organized Crime Agency.

Could you please attempt to use the correct name? - Serious Organised Crime Agency

Re:Is that a real thing?

[xaxa]

I can't believe there's actually a crime fighting organization called the Serious Organized Crime Agency. It's hard to imagine how they could have a sillier name,

They could be called something like the the Department for Homeland Security, or the National Bureau for Investigations.

(Seriously, the American names sound silly to me. Far too self-important and pretentious.)

Re:Is that a real thing?

[mosb1000]

That's not how you spell "organized." I bet you think color is spelled with a "u" too. Ridiculous, learn to speak American!

Re:Is that a real thing?

[Compaqt]

You meet him at his next surgery?

Re:Is that a real thing?

[Xest]

Most MPs in the UK hold what they call surgerys whereby they go somewhere public, such as a town hall and allow citizens to have one-to-one meetings with them to take up issues which they can then choose to raise in parliament.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surgery_(politics)

It's a much more effective way of dealing with issues IMO because they are not given room to easily weasle out of things, and it's easier to tell when they are lying to you, though I recommend saving it for the most serious of issues else they will get fed up of seeing you all the time. For me this is an issue that warrants raising the greivance in a face to face manner as I think this is a pretty gross abuse of police resources clearly pushing a private corporate agenda rather than objectively policing.

Re:Is that a real thing?

[Compaqt]

OK, thanks, I thought he was saying his MP was hard to get a hold of, and he was just going to buttonhole him next time he goes to the hospital, as he won't be able to run away and avoid the public.

Time to Slashdot them...

[lancelet]

Everyone should visit the site with the threatening message. It's time to put the Slashdot effect to good use! :-)

Re:Time to Slashdot them...

[pla]

Everyone should visit the site with the threatening message. It's time to put the Slashdot effect to good use! :-)

Unfortunately, they don't have a feedback form.

Fortunately, if they mean that page at all threateningly, they will probably at least take a glance at the logs - So make sure to not just go to the base domain, but also
rnbxclusive.com/fuck_off_and_die_fascist_pigs
rnbxclusive.com/superinjunction_THIS_filth
rnbxclusive.com/couldnt_find_anyone_jaywalking_eh_thats_some_mighty_fine_police_work_there_lou.

Get creative.

Re:Time to Slashdot them...

[medv4380]

hmm... what would happen if a bot net instead of doing a DoS just had every user "browse" that site?

Re:Time to Slashdot them...

[Anonymous Coward]

rnbxclusive.com/smd should get the message across fine.

Re:Time to Slashdot them...

[Blue Stone]

As a result of illegal downloads young, emerging artists may have had their careers damaged. If you have illegally downloaded music you will have damaged the future of the music industry. [emphasis mine]

Hilarious.

A perfect union of government law enforcement and lying, deceitful, dishonest, morally corrupt shysters (called the music industry) in operation. Zero facts. Zero credibility and destroying the credibility of SOCA's serious work with the alienating, dishohonest hyperbole the seized website now displays.

Every major study published independently has suggested that the opposite of what they say is true. So where the hell do they get off nakedly lying like that? I guess all pretence at independence is gone and they don't mind being seen to be little more that RIAA, BMI (et all) shills.

Makes you realise who's really running government and their institutions in this day and age.

Re:Time to Slashdot them...

[Mitsoid]

TERRORISM http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/terrorism
1: the systematic use of terror especially as a means of coercion

Governments using terrorism to control people then claiming we (the world) need to fight terrorism...

Looks like we need to fight our governments then... I'm not a fan of anarchy though, so I'd recommend simply writing a strongly worded letter to the government to inform them they are engaging in acts of terrorism.
It's actually a funny joke..... Our governments are using what we are fighting...

Complaints link: http://www.soca.gov.uk/contact-soca/complaints

Re:Time to Slashdot them...

[Anonymous Coward]

Jaywalking does not exist as a crime here in the UK.

AC to preserve moderation.

djehuty3

Re:Time to Slashdot them...

[bmo]

while true ; do
wget "http://rnbxclusive.com/suck.my.large.cock.you.wankers/" > /dev/null
sleep 0
done

Change the message and sleep to whatever value you want.

Re:Time to Slashdot them...

[Baseclass]

"Shake harder boy!"

Google...

[ElementOfDestruction]

Google one of the first phrases "If you have downloaded music"+SOPA; the only results are from the last three hours.

I call scam - all jokes aside, could you see government wasting their money taking a site down, then putting up a message like that? Furthermore, can we have an expert on the legality of downloading music (I always thought infringement came with uploading...)?

Serious Organized Crime Agency

[trip23]

I actually enjoyed

If you have downloaded music using this website you may have committed a criminal offence which carries a maximum penalty of up to 10 years

Seriously, is SOCA known for taking down sites? On there website they have

Have you received correspondence purporting to be from SOCA and want to verify its authenticity?
http://www.soca.gov.uk/contact-soca

It kinda sounds fishy to me.. Anyway now they're collecting tons of IP-addresses of Slashdotters who can't resist to click on links.

Strange?

[znx]

Am I the only one that thinks it strange that SOCA would endorse another site; even a site provided by international music groups. I also think the second link makes a really good point, SOCA seizing a .com is a little strange. I don't think they'd threaten either, after all it will all be logs from the past not at the point of takedown that would interest them.

All in all a little strange.

It is my understanding...

[fuzzyfuzzyfungus]

I get the impression that, no matter how rosy the state of the industry or how sweeping the existing state powers, the push for harsher 'anti-piracy' legislation will continue until such time as the primary task of the world's security forces will be the summary execution of those suspected to be guilty of insufficient music purchase during the preceding fiscal year.

Re:It is my understanding...

[jamstar7]

Dingdingding. Got it in one, mushroom. Add to that, taxpayer money to make up the difference between what they got and what they claim they should be getting, and you got yourelf a law.

Re:It is my understanding...

[AaronLS]

"yourelf"
I have an elf?! I hope he is not like the underpants gnomes, whom cause me great frustration in the morning when getting dressed.

Re:It is my understanding...

[lightknight]

*Shrugs* Content-enforcement does not, over the long run, keep the economy afloat. It's unfortunate, but that's part of the reason for the limitations on Intellectual Property -> "We will back up your monopoly on this set of works that you have created for a set period of time with all our might, but after that, it's public domain." The copyright owners, however, have gone a little insane here, and have repeatedly changed those terms through successful lobbying. This poses something of a problem, as greed & stupidity know no limits, and taken to its logical extreme, will result in future populaces being implanted with chips in their brains to help them "forget" content.

See, the original design of Intellectual Property was many fold: 1.) It ensured the inventor / creator got paid, which promotes research and development, 2.) It prevents the inventor / creator from going to the grave with their marvelous invention / songs / writings / whatever locked up in their skull (Bob built an amazing machine, but no one knows how, and now Bob is dead; Ashley wrote this incredible song, but never actually wrote it down, for fear someone would copy it), and 3.) It helps grow society / advance it through freedom of invention (each succeeding generation becomes "richer" in culture / ideas / actual wealth than the previous one, on the basis of societal inheritance).

     

Re:It is my understanding...

[Anonymous Coward]

You should be modded "-1, waste of download cap"

Re:It is my understanding...

[Attila Dimedici]

In the U.S., once they get people used to being forced to buy health insurance by government mandate, they are going to pass a law requiring that you buy a certain number of music tracks from one of the government designated music companies (OK, they will probably pass a law about how much broccoli you have to buy each year first).

Archive.org to the rescue

[Necroman]

So, I wanted to see what was so bad about this site, so I checked out the latest cached version of it from archive.org. It looks like the site wasn't hosting anything that was copyrighted, but provided links to copyrighted content (their downloads from June 2011 seem to use HulkShare.com, but those links are dead).

It's hard to say if he was just providing linking to illegal content or if he was uploading the files to the file sharing sites himself and then providing a link.

Re:Archive.org to the rescue

[pbhj]

You know about this? http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/01/13/us-filesharing-extradition-idUSTRE80C15C20120113

A UK subject is being extradited for actions that his lawyers say are not illegal in the UK (I'm inclined to agree, immoral as they are).

Basically US media companies are currently somehow managing to own worldwide formerly-democratic states to the extent of enforcing US law in, for example, Australia and the UK.

SOCA?

[bmo]

This is one Soca that I won't dance to.

--
BMO

Fake

[M0j0_j0j0]

All of it, from start to beginning.

Re:Fake

[Anonymous Coward]

http://www.soca.gov.uk/news/401-music-website-takedown-latest

Here's some more IPs

[AaronLS]

I like the idea that this being posted on slashdot means their list of IPs is going to get quite large and unwieldy. Are we all going to get extradited? Free trip to UK?

Re:Here's some more IPs

[dadioflex]

It's just one of those javascript dealies you see in people's signatures on forums all the time. Nobody is tracking anybody.

Re:Here's some more IPs

[AaronLS]

Yeh that seemed about the same childish mentality the threat had. That doesn't mean they aren't also recording the IP address on the server side as well, during the get request. I wouldn't doubt that some idiot in their agency truly believed that a list of IPs would have any value at all. I notice that now they have taken off that part of the page. I guess someone pointed at to them the sillyness of their idle threat.

Phew

[kyrio]

It's a good thing it's legal for me to download music in my country because I pay a tax on all blank media and that money goes to all of those poor artists (no it doesn't) that had their careers ruined by my [lack of] downloading their music.

Re:Phew

[91degrees]

It's probably not legal to download music in your country.

It's simply legal to sell the blank media that enables the infringement. This is taxed because it's pretty obvious that some people are going to use it unlawfully.

Re:Phew

[kyrio]

What you said makes no sense. As other countries have implemented, and mine was the first to do so, there is a "sin" tax on blank media that goes to the local recording artist association. That money is supposed to be distributed to all recording artists, though it never has and never will, because it just goes into the pockets of the association's bureaucracy. The next time you comment, do some extremely simple research. Actually, just stop commenting.

Re:Phew

[91degrees]

there is a "sin" tax on blank media that goes to the local recording artist association.

Yes there is.

This doesn't make it legal to copy music. Why would it? The blank media levy is a part of tax law. It makes it legal to sell blank media. Downloading music is covered by copyright law. It's still illegal even though the victims are compensated for it. That's not how it works.

Re:Phew

[kyrio]

Once again, stop commenting on things you know nothing about.

My favorite part

[atari2600a]

My browser is 'Desktop' & my OS is 'UNIX'. My user agent explicitly lists 'chrome' & 'linux x86_64'.

Re:My favorite part

[Deorus]

My browser is Desktop and my OS is Unknown ... on an iPhone...

Re:My favorite part

[phil reed]

I'm on a Mac with Chrome, got the same "Desktop" and "Unknown".

Re:My favorite part

[PPH]

I'm on Linux with lynx and all I get is 'Unknown', 'Unknown'.

[Sniff] We just don't get any respect. What's a guy got to do to get arrested around here?

Blatantly fake.

[gallondr00nk]

Come on, it doesn't even look real. Anyone can relay back browser information. Look at the language. "Arrested for fraud", "damaged the future of the music industry". Official notices don't look like this. They don't go off on stupid tangents about destroying the music industry.

There's some corporate shilling going on here, almost certainly.

Re:Blatantly fake.

[Anonymous Coward]

And why would a Government posting have a copyright notice.
And why would the Government notice say "Visit pro-music.org for a list of legal music sites on the web"

Re:Blatantly fake.

[Prosthetic_Lips]

Has anyone checked out their HTML? With wonders like the snippet below, maybe they need some help (at exorbitant rates, of course):

<tr>
<td class="style125"
&nbsp;</td>
<td class="style135"
<strong><span class="style131"><strong>&nbsp;If you have ...

Someone needs to learn to close their TD tags ...

Re:Blatantly fake.

[Anonymous Coward]

Oh hell they used DreamWeaver!

Probably pirated it too.

Analysis

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, apparently the agency does care about IP href="http://http://www.soca.gov.uk/threats/intellectual-property-crime"> [soca.gov.uk]
The Whois shows it's still owned by 'Suheil Saiyed'; last update Jan 4.
The IP address the domain currently points to (83.138.166.114) is in San Antonio, Texas, and is owned by Rackspace.com, an American company.
The wording on the adver..erm..warning is over-the-top, and is unlikely to have originated from a real governmental agency.
also, it specifically references a commercial site (something a real government agency wouldn't do).
Here's an article on Ars Technica about a similar incident IP href="http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2011/06/no-the-feds-didnt-seize-your-domain-youve-just-been-punked.ars"> [Ars Technica]
All in all, I'm pretty sure it's a hoax.
And I'm suspecting the folks behind pro-music.org (the site referenced in the 'warning').

Re:Analysis

[JPMH]

Wrong. The owner is Rackspace.com of San Antonio, but the server itself is located in the UK, which is why SOCA could indeed have been able to get to it.

inetnum: 83.138.166.64 - 83.138.166.127
netname: RSPC-UK-RACKSPACE-INTERNAL
remarks:
descr: Rackspace Managed Hosting
country: GB
admin-c: IA247-RIPE
tech-c: IA247-RIPE
remarks: rev-srv attribute deprecated by RIPE NCC on 02/09/2009

person: IP Admin
address: Rackspace Managed Hosting
112 E. Pecan St. Suite 600
San Antonio, Texas 78205
phone: +1 210 892 4000
fax-no: +1 210 892 4329
e-mail: ipadmin@rackspace.com
nic-hdl: IA247-RIPE
remarks: ### Rackspace Abuse Department
remarks: ### Please send any complaints to the following:
remarks: ### abuse@rackspace.com
mnt-by: RSPC-MNT
source: RIPE # Filtered

Re:Analysis

[Anonymous Coward]

I used IP geolocation with the IP the domain threw up when I pinged it (from a NL IP address).
I could be wrong, of course.

Re:Analysis

[Anonymous Coward]

The SOCA page you link to talks specifically about "counterfeit goods", and is clearly about "fake stuff" - it mentions designer clothes and accessories, movies (presumably DVDs) and pharmaceuticals. That's quite a far cry from prosecuting people who download a few tunes off the internet.

I tried to submit a report to SOCA to tell them that they'd been the victims of an online identity fraud. Turns out, I need their permission to submit the report to them "on their behalf". So instead I just sent in a complaint about the near-impossibility of a member of the public conveying information to them.

Re:Analysis

[Anonymous Coward]

Welp; turns out to have been a legit SOCA takedown
http://www.soca.gov.uk/news/401-music-website-takedown-latest [soca.gov.uk]

Seriously?

[epp_b]

They have a law with "Serious" in the title as a descriptor? It must be Serious Business!

Re:Seriously?

[amoeba1911]

It's not a law, it's some stupid government agency.

According to soca.gov.uk web site: "SOCA tackles serious organised crime that affects the UK and our citizens. This includes Class A drugs, people smuggling and human trafficking, major gun crime, fraud, computer crime and money laundering."

Yep. You wouldn't smuggle people, you wouldn't traffic humans... sending that mp3 to your friend is just as horrible! Imagine the poor industry executives that can't afford to fill their luxury yacht with cocaine and hookers! Just think of the agony of having multi-million dollar luxury yacht without any hookers or cocaine!

Let's face the facts: They got rich building a business where all they have to do is bring the music from people in group A to people in group B. In the olden times you needed expensive machinery to stamp the records and distribute them, somebody had to pay for that huge initial cost. Many years down the road the process got a bit cheaper with cassette, but still not something an artist could pay for. It got even cheaper with CD's... and the digital revolution brought the cost to negative values. YES, you can make money by simply offering your mp3 on a web site that has ads on it.
.... Now back to the world of the music distribution industry: why are you paying them when even the distribution itself is the source of the revenue??

GIVE ME A BREAK. Their outdated business model needs to go, they just didn't get the clue yet... they still think they are rendering a valuable service. Reality is quite to the contrary, they are taking profits that would otherwise go to artists. The big media distribution companies are the reason why artists are starving. They need to go. Some artists are too dumb/brainwashed/high to realize this, but some recognize it and embrace today's world.

That logo was clearly designed by a ten year old.

[niallj]

Seems likely to be a fake. I really hoped the logo was fake too, but it seems not. That is their actual logo. Nothing says "we're serious about catching criminals" like a stylized Jaguar logo.

Wow.

[cheekyjohnson]

They're really cracking down on those evil music downloaders, aren't they? This is surely a worthy cause and we need to spend twice the amount of taxpayer money going after these most heinous of criminals.

I really hope that's the case

[Sparx139]

And I also hope that they find whoever is behind it, hopefully someone in the record industry rather than someone pulling a prank. There'd be hell to pay :D

Re:I really hope that's the case

[Anonymous Coward]

Given the link to pro-music at the bottom, it seems like the IFPI wrote the outline that they wanted.
SOCA have confirmed that the warning page is genuine.

Online predators?

[J'raxis]

SOCA's arms depict a predatory animal mauling the globe. What an appropriate and refreshingly honest emblem for a state agency.

Re:Online predators?

[Anonymous Coward]

Posting to undo mod...

Re:Online predators?

[Anonymous Coward]

That doesn't work when you post anonymously.

Re:Online predators?

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, it does... if you're logged in. Original post was accidentally modded redundant.

False dichotomy

[Anonymous Coward]

Opposing artificial scarcity is not the same thing as preventing artists from being paid for their work. It just means the artists need to adapt their business model to one that better monetizes the production of an abundant good. Those who think this can't be done are either lying or intentionally ignorant.

Terror

[koan]

This is terrorism 101, scare the crap out of everyone because the laws and filters aren't going to work, yeah I know calling ti terrorism is hyperbole and dilutes the meaning but it's so timely. =) (smiley on /. infidel!)
Check this out: http://pastebin.com/pVmAZqWY
How many factual errors can you find?

Re:UK = not worth living in, period.

[koan]

Don't forget the food!!!

A criminal abuse of power.

[Anonymous Coward]

Is the UK government even trying to look like it serves it's citizens anymore? Despite trying to convince my MP to vote against the Digital Economy Act and donating to the Pirate Party I'm still ashamed to be a Brit today.

With every passing year I grow older and more cynical. I spend less time and effort trying to change things "the right way" and more on the development of distributed systems and anonymity.

The laws in the UK are such that I have always been and know I will always be a criminal and after a number of years your way of thinking really changes. Regardless of what others say, I will be true to myself.

Surely it's a hoax?

[dnewt]

I have a strong suspicion this is a hoax. The wording just doesn't seem like something SOCA, or any other law enforcement agency would say in this situation. For a start, the statement "stolen from the artists" suggests they're already guilty. That's for a jury to decide. The statement regarding "damaged careers" really doesn't seem like something SOCA would say. It's not SOCA's place to say something like that, and strongly doubt they ever would. The link to pro-music.org seems to be pushing the agenda of the music business too. Why would SOCA endorse what is effectively a campaign to push the music industry's agenda? I'm really not convinced.

Indicentally, The Register has picked up the story. I hope they checked their facts first.

Re:Surely it's a hoax?

[PPH]

So, how did a non law enforcement group get hold of someone's domain? I mean, I can see law enforcement taking it, following some judicial action (injunction, trial, etc.). And posting a page to that effect. But if this is the doings of pro-music.org, it just underlines the legitimate fears we all have about things like SOPA/PIPA.

Its not a case of having a violating site pulled down. We are getting dangerously close to a situation where the recording industry (or anyone else with political power) can grab property for their own use. And the governments are providing the muscle. Now I know how the Native Americans felt..

Re:Surely it's a hoax?

[Anonymous Coward]

Unfortunately People who download music's descendants won't get tax-free status in 200 years.

Re:Surely it's a hoax?

[91degrees]

Hackers? This wouldn't be the first time a hacker has changed the content of a website. And at the moment, it's only 8:30am here. They could be waiting for someone to get into the office (possibly at their ISP) before this can be fixed.

If it is hackers, then this is actually unusually creative, but it's possible.

Re:Surely it's a hoax?

[Anonymous Coward]

Indicentally, The Register has picked up the story. I hope they checked their facts first.

It appears so.

Re:Surely it's a hoax?

[Anonymous Coward]

Read elsewhere that several people have apparently phoned the SOCA querying this only to be told it's genuine. I agree that the whole thing contains loads of erroneous statements and the whole thing looks like it's been conjured up by some 17-year old hacker in his bedroom with a serious attitude problem. Entirely inaccurate and unprofessional in every way.

Why aren't copyright holder happy?

[lcam]

For the same reasons Christians must accept they are born sinners. There are some very fundamentalist ideas behind this latest movement; the ownership of information, art, and all things related. In an age where information is freely available there must be some way to legitimize one's claim to property to every length possible. The cruel and inhuman reality is that legitimate claim is and the means to enforce such claims is the newest way to create people who are "more equal" then others.

Time to ship the war

[scurvyj]

That is one of the most immature and idiotic messages I've ever seen on a website. I think its time we showed them who is really boss in the West.

Re:Time to ship the war

[Anonymous Coward]

And the answer would be "whoever obviously hacked the website"? Seriously, how is that NOT a hoax? Face it, man, you got trolled. Badly.

funny...

[Anonymous Coward]

Went to the site... they had the wrong IP address and apparently my android tablet is now a desktop computer...

Time to take their toys away

[mykos]

If people can't enforce copyright without rushing headlong into a police state, I think we should take away that privilege of copyright which society has afforded them. And this isn't some extreme slippery slope argument. We are on that slippery slope and we are sliding down it right now.

I'm sure there are defeatist pedants who will come along and say "Good luck taking it away! They're too powerful and they have too much money!", but you have to start somewhere. And having that attitude means they have one less person to fight.

Re:Time to take their toys away

[Anonymous Coward]

Couldn't we avoid a police state by passing SOPA - so that record companies can take down sites without police involvement?

Innocent until proven guilty?

[mar.kolya]

Isn't SOCA just a law enforcement agency, i.e. 'police'? They are not court, are they? Then how can they say "The majority of music files that were available via this site were stolen from the artists." - this have not been proven in court, have it? Isn't it illegal to call people criminals before they are actually convicted? Or at least unprofessional? I bet they do not talk like this if son of some politician gets caught trafficking drugs? They just refuse to comment... And here they just shout all over Internet about this. What happened to simple police professionalism, huh?

Re:Innocent until proven guilty?

[Skapare]

RIAA or the UK equivalent, told them so. So it must be right.

Music sales had their best year ever

[Anonymous Coward]

"No, they don't. They have possession of _one_ copy. They have lost possession of all the other copies"

*All* other copies? If the existence of 1 pirated version was enough to kill all sales, then there would be no sales of music, none. US music track sales had their best ever year last year, again showing strong growth:

http://blog.nielsen.com/nielsenwire/consumer/cue-the-music-driven-by-digital-music-sales-up-in-2011/

RIAA's share of that market continues to plummet, now 30%. I don't subscribe to the idea that piracy drives sales, but it certainly doesn't prevent *all* sales as you claim. The technology that make pirating possible, also more than *doubled* sales of music tracks since 2005, and strongly increased the profit made on those tracks by artists.

It's not theft, its copyright infringement. It's the reduction in potential earnings from selling the work under copyright. A different lesser law. It's less than theft, because if they stole the master copy, then all potential sales would be lost, including all those 1.5 billion tracks *sold* in the US last year.

SOCA could not propagandize like that, it would make them appear to be a political campaigning group, not a police enforcement group. It would also undermine their own case. So this must be a joke or spoof.

Really the two extreme views are the problem here, copyright could easily be fixed if RIAA & MPAA didn't keep lobbying for extreme laws, and SOCA can't possibly be at the fringe of legality (or illegality in this case since if they seized the site outside of the law then they themselves would be doing an illegal act).

Worse than manslaughter

[tsa]

Thanks to the likes of the RIAA downloading a song from the internet is now considered worse than manslaughter.

Lucky I searched for the string that made me LMFAO

[Anonymous Coward]

As a result of illegal downloads young, emerging artists may have had their careers damaged. If you have illegally downloaded music you will have damaged the future of the music industry. [emphasis mine]

Hilarious.

A perfect union of government law enforcement and lying, deceitful, dishonest, morally corrupt shysters (called the music industry) in operation. Zero facts. Zero credibility and destroying the credibility of SOCA's serious work with the alienating, dishohonest hyperbole the seized website now displays.

Every major study published independently has suggested that the opposite of what they say is true. So where the hell do they get off nakedly lying like that? I guess all pretence at independence is gone and they don't mind being seen to be little more that RIAA, BMI (et all) shills.

Makes you realise who's really running government and their institutions in this day and age.

Thanks for saving my fingers from the typing, mate!

Private Layer

[Anonymous Coward]

Server was hosted by Private Layer in Switzerland but that server is now offline so looks like they seized it. I wonder how they pulled that off a company in Switzerland but owned by a company based in Panama.

Re:Private Layer

[Skapare]

Seizing a domain name and seizing an IP address (or the hardware it terminates at), are different things. They could have done them all.

Defamation

[tbird81]

I've written a complaint to SOCA.

It looks like they're defaming the owners: "The majority of music files that were available via this site were stolen from the artists."

It's like arresting someone on suspicion of rape, and then (before any conviction) stating publicly "this guy's a rapist". Rape's a serious crime, copying files isn't.

Re:Defamation

[Skapare]

I've written a complaint to SOCA.

It looks like they're defaming the owners: "The majority of music files that were available via this site were stolen from the artists."

It's like arresting someone on suspicion of rape, and then (before any conviction) stating publicly "this guy's a rapist". Rape's a serious crime, copying files isn't.

However, the people running the RIAA and MPAA think differently. They think that stopping anything and everything that bumps into their revenue streams ... even independent labels just making their own unique content and self publishing ... is way more important than issues like rape, kiddie porn, child slave trade, or even terrorism. Follow what those people do and this will be so clear.

policing is by consent

[Webspit]

and that soca notice suggests they have forgottn that so are legitimate targets for public contempt.

Shockingly enough...

[Tastecicles]

...they got my WAN IP wrong (the page showed me the IP of my proxy), they got my OS info wrong (I spoof the identifier just because I can), and they got my browser info wrong (ditto).

If they can't get basic information like that right, what the hell hope do they think they have in prosecuting (not me, my proxy service!)?

How long before Anonymous...

[Anonymous Coward]

hacks the site back?

Email to publiccomplaints@soca.x.gsi.gov.uk

[dud83]

I emailed publiccomplaints@soca.x.gsi.gov.uk the following: To whom it may concern, The message on rnbxclusive.com states the following: Your IP Your Browser Your OS Time / Date my_ip Firefox10.0.1 WinNT 09:00:26 15/02/2012 "The above information can be used to identify you and your location. SOCA has the capability to monitor and investigate you, and can inform your internet service provider of these infringements. You may be liable for prosecution and the fact that you have received this message does not preclude you from prosecution." According to Norwegian laws it is illegal for you to store personal information about me, outside Norway, without my consent and due reason for storing such data. I have never visited rnbxclusive.com before today so you cannot possibly have any proof that I have committed a criminal offence. Secondly, you operate under UK law which does not apply to me as a Norwegian citizen. In summary: I demand that you immediately remove all data you have collected in regards to my person. Please confirm as soon as this has been done. Failure to comply may result in SOCA being liable for criminal prosecution under Norwegian law. Regards, my_name

Re:Email to publiccomplaints@soca.x.gsi.gov.uk

[Anonymous Coward]

how about this:

The text on rnbxclusive.com explicitly states that "SOCA has the capability to monitor and investigate me". Per the EU Data Privacy Directive 95/46/EC, that makes me a Data Subject and I am entitled to receive an explanation on which data is being collected, for what purpose and with whom said data will be shared. As a consquence, I kindly request you to provide me with the proper avenue along which I can request said information. I also expect SOCA to acknowledge that, as a citizen of $random_eu_country, I am not subject to UK law regardless of what the boilerplate text asserts.

Worth a shot?

damaged future of the music industry

[blue_goddess]

If you have illegally downloaded music you will have damaged the future of the music industry.

Sounds like a good reason to download music :>

I've done all the dumb things

[TapeCutter]

I'm 50-something and as the song goes I've done all the dumb things. Your post reminded me of one of those dumb things, I made the mistake of letting her ass distract me from the moron who owned it. One of the many strange arguments in this short but entertaining relationship was about me trying not to laugh when she claimed in all seriousness that NASA had aliens in the basement, she refused to look at the NASA website because it was "propaganda" (for or against what - I don't recall her saying). And I'm not talking about a drug fucked 18yo here, she was a 40yo working mum with two teenage kids.

My ex-wife OTOH is smart but (was) incredibly ignorant due to a lack of education beyond her control. She once came home from work and said to me "do you know what batteries store?, "Electricity?" I replied. She was 30yo and blown away by this news, when I asked her what she had thought they stored, she said "Oh I don't know. Ommmph!", again I was in trouble for stifling my amusement!

Of course getting angry at someone who points out you have been conned/misinformed is called "shooting the messenger" but in humanity's defence the reaction does seem to be an universal one. I would find it very difficult to believe anyone who claims they are certain they have never taken a pot shot at a messenger and never will.

Re:I've done all the dumb things

[Anonymous Coward]

I think these stories are entirely apocryphal since they mention "relationships" and "ex-wives", and you strike me as very much the kind of person who has neither.

I think it's warranted

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm a music blogger myself, but from looking at the top40 pop tracks that RnBXclusive have posted over the last year from Kelly Clarkson to Leona Lewis - they give music blogging a bad name. The SOCA threat of 10 years in prison for downloading on the take-down page is ridiculous with them unable to even convict Oink's operators a few years back, but the take-down itself is warranted I think. http://www.techfruit.com/2012/02/15/soca-takes-down-uk-music-blog-rnbxclusive/

Wow way to farm PageRank!

[bWareiWare.co.uk]

How obvious dose a hoax have to be?

Re:SOCA message strikes me offensive

[TaoPhoenix]

And the submitter couldn't be bothered to say that the message contains the following dynamically generated info:

"Your IP. Your Browser. Date. This info can be used to identify you"?

So because it's a news story, all of us are on there too.

I'm half dreading they'll actually go after the news-story lookiloos (us) just because we visited.

Reported on BBC Radio

[ResistanceIsIrritati]

Just heard this story reported on BBC radio. It ended saying that a man was arrested and bailed in Leicestershire in relation. Not up on the BBC news site yet. Doesn't guarantee it's genuine - I've known BBC radio news to be fooled before.

Re:Reported on BBC Radio

[ResistanceIsIrritati]

Now up on the BBC News site: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-17039722

The most unpopular comment on /. today

[concealment]

Theft is theft.

Scenario 1:

I spend two years of time in a lab, inventing a new drug that cures cancer. I can make it for cents a dose. However, this is the one big discovery of my life, and I'm hoping to retire on this, so I copyright it and sell the drug at a huge profit.

Scenario 2:

I spend two years of my life writing, improving and recording an album. Each individual CD or download costs me only pennies. However, this is the one big innovation of my life; popular bands don't improve over time but tend to get worse. I'm hoping to retire on this, so I copyright it and sell the music at a huge profit.

What's the difference?

Theft is theft. That it's easy should not make a difference.

I'll defend MP3 sharing in podcasts or low-bitrate samples as "the new radio" and "try before buying," but you probably only need a few samples or a couple songs on a radiocast to see that.

What people are doing here is taking the labor of other individuals and destroying their ability to profit from it.

Re:The most unpopular comment on /. today

[Maury Markowitz]

> Theft is theft. That it's easy should not make a difference.

I agree completely.

The old adage is "time is money", so by my measure, if I took time to do something, anything, I should have the ability to make money from it.

This is a *theoretical* issue. We as a society can decide what we choose to value and protect. We used to value land above all, but today we have a wider concept of "work" and "ownership" that includes "ideas". If we, as a society, decide that we believe people should be able to protect ideas, then we protect ideas. Its as simple as that.

> What people are doing here is taking the labor of other individuals and destroying their ability to profit from it.

I disagree completely.

This is *not* a theoretical issue, as dollars are real-world objects. So then instead of simply deciding the outcome, we *have* to measure it. We can pass all the laws we want repealing gravity, but the universe won't care.

So then we need an empirical result. No problem! Movie piracy is rampant, yet the movie industry continues to demonstrate record profits.

Sorry, the real world disagrees with your statement.

Re:The most unpopular comment on /. today

[concealment]

The theoretical/empirical distinction you draw above is nonsense. If something is theft, and we claim that we cannot show results of it, that does not change its status as theft. Furthermore, the empirical data you posted do not take into account most of the factors we must analyze here.

The movie industry as a whole is doing quite well thanks to its blockbusters; however, that does not measure the impact on independent films or smaller filmmakers. In fact, it measures the industry as a whole and does not tell us (a) if they would be doing better without piracy and (b) what individual parts of the industry are doing. Some might point to a consolidation of power in the industry around "blockbuster" films as a negative consequence of piracy.

Finally, you have only measured one industry out of several. I found this article on the music industry to be enlightening:

http://articles.businessinsider.com/2011-02-18/tech/30052663_1_riaa-music-industry-cd-era

We should also look at software and book publishing as they are also affected.

Here is the address to complain to;

[Anonymous Coward]

The Royal Frog Trampling Institute
16 Rayners Lane
London, W.C. Fields.

I'll just repeat that...

Tristram and Isolde Phillips
7.30 Covent Garden
Saturday (near Sunday)
and afterwards at the Inigo Jones Fish Emporium.

WTF?

[Anonymous Coward]

Do you even get ten years and an unlimited fine for murder anymore in the UK?

Re:UK = not worth living in, period.

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't forget the food!!!

What is wrong with the food?

Wikipedia lists some fine examples of British cuisine...
Jellied eels
Rollmops
Kippers
Pork pies
Steak and kidney pudding
Toad in the hole
Black pudding
Faggots
Bubble and squeak
Beef Wellington
Spotted dick

Thisn is rubbish!

[Anonymous Coward]

Well - the SOCA are certainly going after a VERY SERIOUS crime here. I can really sleep well in my bed at nights now. Never mind about murderers, muggers and rapists. Let's go for something nice and easy.
This is total twaddle and out-and-out scaremongering by someone who obviously doesn't know what they're talking about. It's my understanding that copying/sharing only becomes a criminal case if there is a profit made. Otherwise it's a civil matter. Oh - and, by the way, shouldn't: "Arrested for fraud" be: "Arrested on suspicion of fraud". This sounds like a case of guilty unless proven innocent to my untrained eye, not to mention slander or libel. The whole page looks amateurish and containing the sort of threats that might appear on a phishing mail. It's already been stated that an IP address doesn't identify a particular person and what have "young artists' careers" got to do with any law enforcement or alleged criminal aspects? It's not up to the SOCA to make statements like that. I read elsewhere today that private companies have been paying police to make investigations. Makes you wonder, eh? The whole thing is a travesty.

Stolen

[hobarrera]

The site says the music was STOLEN. It doesn't say they where ilegal reproductions, or in violation of copyright law.
So does this mean that someone actually STOLE the music? By definition, this means they too the cd, dvd, wharever, and the artists no longer have their copy!
Comming from a self-proclaimed "serious" organization, this is pretty ridiculous.

Also, they'll notify my ISP, but all I did was look at a banner they posted!

Brutish scaremongering

[Anonymous Coward]

It isn't yet illegal to download an mp3. Know your rights and do not be fazed by the jackbooted thugs use of psychological tactics.

Re:Mozilla10?

[DERoss]

The Mozilla organization has released Firefox 10.0 and even 10.0.1, but there is no browser actually named Mozilla that has a version 10.