Slashdot Mirror
NBC Universal Patents a Way To Detect BitTorrent Pirates In Real-Time (ndtv.com)
An anonymous reader writes: NBC Universal has been granted a patent, titled "Early detection of high volume peer-to-peer networks in real-time," to try and restrict piracy of its copyrighted content. "Early detection of high volume swarms in a peer-to-peer network, including a data feed of peer-to-peer swarm activity, and an analytics engine processing the data feed and identifying the high volume swarms that have parameters that exceed a threshold. The system can include a pre-processing section for conditioning the swarm data for the analytics section. There can also be a verification section that confirms that the peer download file matches the target file," notes the patent document issued by USPTO (United States Patent and Trademark Office). "The early detection provides for enhanced anti-piracy efforts, improved allocation of network resources, and better business decision-making," it adds. NBC Universal says that the "P2P infrastructure has many advantages" but it has also led to abuses. Piracy is estimated to cost content owners billions of dollars annually. "These costs are typically passed along to the consuming public in terms of increased costs for legitimate purchased works and higher charges for increased deterrents to the piracy," NBC Universal added. The patent NBC Universal received was applied for back in 2009, but only granted last week.
So, they've had this ability for 7 years. How's that worked out for them? The fact that they're getting a patent on a process that hasn't stopped their content from being pirated doesn't seem like that big a deal. I think the decline in the quality of their content is a bigger deterrent to piracy than anything else they've done.
It's an algorithm that takes samples, averages them, then notifies on certain thresholds.
While I might respect patents, I disrespect patenting such basic things especially when they steal them from Children and don't pay them for it until they turn bad.
I also can't respect somebody's "content" as being "owned" when they distribute it to anyone and everyone for free over radio waves.
I don't understand why they had to give up on basic math and science, did they fuck that up or what happened?
I see a time when it will be much easier to track this kind of activity and apparently it's not too far off. As sales dwindle for digital content the increase to stop illegal downloads will increase. Heck, is there anything worth downloading illegally anyway? Why risk it when you end up with a lousy copy that maybe doesn't work and has ate up a ton of your data. Just to find out the content sucked anyway.
So when's Universal going to be slapped with a CFAA lawsuit? You just know that they have to be interacting with systems they don't have rights to to do this.
Even more on why comcast sucks like I want to download shows off of NBC.
When will the content producers realize that "Pirates" are not lost sales. They never were sales, thus estimating losses is pointless. The only way to really combat a large number of people wanting something for free is to make it accessible for a price the population is willing to pay. It also doesn't help that everybody wants such a tight grip on their own stuff that they force consumers (not pirates) to find simpler routes to the content, that don't involve first borns or animal sacrifice.
For our visual folks, this cartoon from the Oatmeal should help.
Personally, if I had to pay $10 for each of NBC, Disney, CBS, and other channel groups, I might as well just suck it up and pay for cable TV. If instead I was able to pay $1 for a channel that I actually cared about a-la carte, then I'd be much happier. Then those lesser-watched channels would fade away and content providers would actually have to work to make good stuff, not tack-on the "old lady watering her garden" channel HD. I'd be spending $15 a month and getting what I want. If the channel doesn't pull in enough, then maybe they can subsidize with some self-promotion like HBO does.
Piracy is estimated to cost content owners billions of dollars annually.
It should read:
Piracy is estimated to cost ADVERTISERS billions of dollars annually.
It's television, folks; the only people making any money off this are the advertisers. Oh and by the way? Most of us aren't paying any attention to your damned commercials anyway. We skip right over them, one way or another. Personally if I couldn't do that, I'd go back to the Old Days of just muting them and paying attention to something else until the program came back on. Or, if I couldn't use a DVR anymore for some reason I'd probably stop watching TV completely, since little-to-none of it would fit into my schedule anymore. So how about you stop whining about 'piracy', NBC (and television in general), at least we're watching your damned shows at all. Look at it this way: You're getting people interested in watching your shows this way. Make it too much of a pain in the ass, and many people just won't bother.
Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
they implement something like this on comcast? what's the rate on false positives? what will they do when they 'detect' something 'unwanted'?
feds, still think it was wise to approve such a large merger, combining so much content with two different, and conflicting, delivery mechanisms?
Hopefully they sue their "competition" for infringement. No matter who looses, we win...
Now your ISP can't use it.
Have gnu, will travel.
They'd have to introduce this at the ISP level, similar to how Time Warner Cable sends cease and desist letters to people if they detect you're torrenting their or their partners' content (a friend of mine got one for HBO shows. They required him to run a script on his computer verifying the file was deleted. WTF?!)
But the thing is, people who get massive amounts of content this way don't BT to their machines! Most use seedboxes and rsync back to their home machines. They're only going to get the people who are not big in the game (relatively).
Plus, once you identify, the next phase may be blocking at the ISP level. Then you get into censorship, network neutrality, etc.
Fuck everything about this.
I'm entitled to a lot more than what they want me to have and throwing their muscle around, so I'm quietly taking things we would have agreed I wouldn't in compensation.
I'm entitled to ignore their product and not use or buy it.
In their eyes, I'm just as bad as you are.
Make no mistake, they want to force-feed everyone their product and then bill you for the honor. I'd rather someone force-feed them bullets and then all the survivors would be happy. Screw those greedy bastards in every orifice with a rusty wire brush.
So if it wasn't for piracy they would be charging less for their product out of the kindness of their hearts even though it apparently sells just fine at this higher price? Sounds like a big pile of bullshit to me.
Why patent a method for catching pirates? Is the point to catch them, or is the point to make a business of catching them. Sheesh!
To not distribute using torrents?
If not for pirates their industry would not even exist today.
No one listens to radio, lots more cords would have been cut.
Blue ray and DVD players are in the same trash can as tube TV's
Better wake up.
You can get the same treatment as cops if you behave like one. Bullets.
Can we just have the article renamed to Comcast instead of NBC Universal, since they're the same danm company? This is similar how they always file their lawsuits under the the RIAA/MPAA names, to mask who's doing the bullshit.
The reality is that Comcast doesn't want you to use your Comcast connection to download Comcast content without using the Comcast approved DRM software. WOAH, I'M STARTING TO SOUND JUST LIKE THE APPS GUY ON HERE NOW!
from one market to another so there is no money lost, it just gets spent somewhere else. It fuels other market segment and might even generate more tax from sales/services for the gov. NOW that is if you believe every download means a lost sale. I got 800+ reason to download my dvd collection when I feel like it and delete the digital file when I don't want it anymore.
by TheSpoom (715771) Uncaring Linux user here. I have nothing to add to this but please continue. *munches popcorn*
I spend $1000-$2000 on Humble Bundles per year.
I haven't pirated a single game during this time.
I guess there are a few which do a little of both because they need to own the product for online play or really want stats or skins or whatever but beyond that there are of course those who buy their product and those who don't.
They are free to argue that if everyone HAD to pay then more WOULD pay and as such they could deliver more expensive to make products.
But now that's not the scenario and the pirates are irrelevant and they will make the content they think they can manage to sell. It's not like they will make this game or movie or whatever they don't think they can get their money back on and then increase the prices much more for everyone to become totally sure they totally won't get their money back .. :D
That's complete bullshit.
Yeah, if we are fewer who pay we get a shittier product.
But don't tell me they act like if everyone would buy the product even though they know they aren't.
I have downloaded the occassional e-book or comic possibly because I could and could save money that way but sometimes also to "complete" the collection I got through the bundle. But the thing is if they didn't offered the bundle I wouldn't had paid for it and I wouldn't had known about their product and no I won't buy single issue comic books electronically for $10 each thank you so the situation is that they got their $15 for a bunch of comics regardless. It's just that if they decided to not include the last 2 issues or future issues or whatever then maybe I'll try to get them later too. They still got my money. Be happy.
Even if all the comics for instance is available as torrents $15 is cheap enough I can pay that even for something I could get for free. It's a fair price and I don't mind fair prices. I can pay some euros for smaller games and up to 30 euro or so for a larger title too. I think $1 is a fair price for an ebook. I don't think $10 is a fair price for a PDF file or that small games should cost â30 and that large titles should cost â150 with all the DLC. Or well, feel free to price them as such but I won't be buying them!! That doesn't mean I'll pirate them either.
I guess if NBC wanted to sell to someone like me then they better NOT increase their prices but rather lower them and I'll pay because I'd consider both the product and my time worth it.
Bring it on! If anti-piracy becomes 99.99% effective then we'll start seeing a lot more open source projects/free projects. Right now, there are thousands of developers/ICT guys with a lot of spare time being dedicated to consuming Hollywood content. Kick them off that gravy train and see what happens. Noone is going to start spending money they don't have on stuff they don't need.
...we spend more money tracking down people pirating movies than we do tracking down people who topple sky scrapers.
Soooo.....
IF people didn't pirate the content, you would sell it for cheaper??
I may have been born at night, but it wasn't last night....
--Hired Net Grunt
its not the the pirates didn't catch on 7 years ago and start encrypting all the torrents.
because your shows are just SO great, right?
Not like a bunch of teen hearthrob garbage & phone endorsements, right?
all those GOLDEN MONEY that was almost physically in their pockets but was STOLEN
straight from the mouths of their spoiled Bel-Air children!
will Hadassah get only, just merely an Escalade for her Sweet Superficial 16? her vapid, cuntal-bitch sparkle dreams DESTROYED BY PIRACY
how ever will the managment indulge their stupid faggotchildren now?
Try to remove "try and" from your lexicon. It's as invalid as "irregardless".
It's 2016, new, unique ideas do not exist. We're all just building on top of foundations laid before us. Locking up an idea and charging a toll for it is theft from our collective resource.
By filing a patent, the techniques are all now publicly available, including to the designers of torrent clients. With these techniques made public, it won't be long before a new generation of torrent software is available which can circumvent those techniques.
If I can be modded down for being a troll, can I be modded up for being an orc, or a balrog?
And of course violating your right to privacy and illegally obtaining IP addresses, if you try to get hidden phone numbers in an illegal manner you go to jail but be you a rich media company you get away with illegal wiretapping...
When they lower the cost for a movie, I'll believe that piracy results in increased costs.
Laws are rules for the court, but merely a bottom bar to hit for life. Think beyond laws in your actions always.
MSNBC = Microsoft National Broadcasting Company
They didn't become a US Government propaganda outlet for shits and giggles, nor was it an accident. Nor is Bill Gates' seed bank so he can plant poppies in his 200th year on earth.
It is a mother fucking US Government shop, guilty of aiding and abetting the US Government in treason. Exclamation point.
This is why Windows is spyware.
I suggest everybody go to kat.cr and download Pirates of Silicon valley and Anti-trust. The first is a movie about how Bill Gates and Steve Jobs fucked Xerox over, then Anti-trust the movie about the based-on-Microsoft fictional name "Synapse". The movie was inspired by the actual Microsoft antitrust case where the US government threatened to split Microsoft into two companies, which ended basically in a slap on the wrist and some shh shh shh ok ok. Now they fucking spy.
Seriously go download their shit and instead of paying for those movies, buy a nice box of chocolates. Enjoy :)
Downloading the show that I missed last night on the cable service I pay for is cheating content providers out of their fair share! They are entitled to an extra $15 just because I have to work when they choose to air their show!
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
As long as they have Jimmy Fallon and that other dolt that comes on after him, people illegally downloading "content" is the least of their problems. Wouldn't bet on NBC being around in 5-10 years.
What a complete load of bullshit. A small distributor in Browns Plains can do a relatively tiny print run of 10,000 Kipling's 1946 Jungle Book DVDs, sell them in Coles and Woolworths clearance bins for $2.99 each, and everyone still makes a profit. What's everyone else's excuse for print runs in the millions still having price tags more than $30.00 each? (Answer: corporate fucking greed!)
Requiem for the American Dream
Are they planning to sue every other content provider which tries to detect piracy?
What are you entitled to that they don't want you to have?
... show that I missed last night...because I have to work when they choose to air their show!
If that's the case, why not just use the app or even website to watch it?
The public domain.
the ability to copy it, which harms no-one
why are the entitled to prevent me from having what I can freely copy without harming anyone?
I care less and less about what Hollywood has to offer, endless reboots of movies and tv entertainment filled with shameless product placements to pay for the insane paychecks.
Maybe it is just that I am getting old and have seen most of what they have to offer before, just in another wrapping.
I like youtube now and all the amateurs videos you see around their(not the professionel "youtubers" so much).
try and restrict piracy of its copyrighted content.
Again, a couple of reminders...
(1) The term "piracy" is only correct if the offender is making a monetary profit. If you burn DVDs and sell them for $10 each, then you're a pirate. If you use bittorrent to exchange files for no monetary compensation, then you're not a pirate -- instead, the uploader is engaging in what's called "unauthorized distribution".
(2) The term "copyrighted content" is often better written as "copyright-protected content". The Linux kernel is considered "copyrighted content", but it's perfectly fine for anyone to distribute it over bittorrent. For NBC Universal, their copyright is being used to restrict distribution -- so in that case, it's more precise to call it "copyright-protected". In fact, the term "copyrighted" is almost meaningless because every privately-created work automatically enjoys copyright protection (in many countries).
I know a guy who knows a guy who does the following to help protect his torrenting actions... 1) he uses a blocklist of the known IPs of the MPAA, RIAA, their attorneys, and media content owners (ie: NBC)... 2) has his torrent client configured to be encrypted and only connect to encrypted peers... 3) uses a free VPN service and routes all traffic through the VPN in a foreign country while torrenting. So I'm curious... does the above detection in the patent still have bearing with what is essentially double-encrypted? Is my friend's friend flirting with danger but doens't realize it? And if encryption is the answer... at what point do we start telling all torrent client dev's to default to only talking to encrypted peers?
I get why NBC Universal is attempting to do in this matter, however if they are monitoring these in real-time how much faster could they possibly react to stopping the content from being pirated?
just because somebody is using bit-torrent does not mean they are a pirate.
Alternate perspective: perhaps you should be able to copy freely, but you should pay anyway, because it's the right thing to do. In other words, your both wrong. NBC, and you.
^^ Also, they are entitled by copyright laws. The only way they can prevent you from doing the wrong thing (taking without contributing to the creator) they must limit freedoms, via legislation.
Perhaps some who torrent have paid already. That's just unfortunate collateral damage.
There is no ethical premise for pirating content. You should respect other people's work. If you disagree with their business model, you should boycott them, not consume their products.
Close, but not quite right. The truth is that we're all entitled to free content or on our terms. (i.e. everyone is either going to be a customer, or not be a customer.) If I pay you, then it is strictly necessary that there not be any DRM. OTOH, if there is DRM, then pirates are entitled to pirate and create and distribute DRM-free copies, since the copyright owner does not sell it at all. The copyright owner opted out of the market, for whatever the fuck stupid fucked-up fucking-retarded reason.
DRM == Piracy. If you advocate DRM, you advocate piracy. Lots of companies are currently advocating these things, so of course there's a lot of piracy happening right now. People are just doing what they're told. Some experts predict the media industry may eventually become interested in making money, but this is apparently a very low priority. (Just don't tell the stockholders!!)
BTW, first paragraph applies to all markets, not just things covered by copyright. It applies to food, cars, etc. Either the vendor supplies what the customer wants to pay for, or else he goes home without any cash in his pocket. "The customer is always right" is probably best (but less cleverly) phrased as: either succeed in selling it, or fail to sell it. DRM is a choice to heavily bias the outcome toward failure. Make it attractive, and I'll buy your file or car. But if you decide to go to extra trouble to make it suck: NO SALE.
Although in many cases, these can be found as physical media on Amazon etc. There's something nice about having a shelf full of "classics" up beside the TV
The really old stuff I'm not sure they'd even bother to be monitoring.
BTW, first paragraph applies to all markets, not just things covered by copyright. It applies to food, cars, etc.
So if I don't want to pay the price for a car, I'm entitled to it for free? BRB going to a Ferrari dealership.
If technology allowed for you to trivially make copies of a Ferrari, then yes.
Is "consume" the right word? It's information. Having it doesn't prevent others from having it.
"Piracy is estimated to cost content owners billions of dollars annually. "These costs are typically passed along to the consuming public in terms of increased costs for legitimate purchased works and higher charges for increased deterrents to the piracy,""
did anyone else read this as "we think we should be making more money than we are, so we will blame pirating and charge more for our stuff".