dslreports logo
site
spacer

spacer
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


view:
topics flat nest 
Comments on news posted 2013-03-04 10:48:48: Techdirt directs our attention to the fact that one of the companies behind tracking copyright violations for the new six strikes anti-piracy initiative has been falsely flagging video game mods as copyrighted content. ..

page: 1 · 2 · next


gatorkram
Need for Speed
Premium
join:2002-07-22
Winterville, NC
kudos:3
Reviews:
·Suddenlink

1 recommendation

Oh boy...

I have always had the feeling, these people have no clue what they are doing..

I asked a question a long time ago, in another post, about how these companies go about figuring out what you are doing, is even infringement.

Do they host the files themselves like a honeypot, and wait for people to connect, download and share, or do they just randomly look for files with particular names, and then join those swarms, and start collecting IPs, etc.

I wonder, how much you even have to share, before it becomes a violation, or how much of a download you have to complete.

So many questions, and so few real answers... I don't see any problems at all from this, oh and I have some water front property you might be interested in...

edit: spelling
--
What the heck is a GatorKram? »www.gatorkram.com



Heh213

join:2012-06-16

1 recommendation

There's basically no punishment for filing a false DMCA claim, and many are automated.

As for the Six strike system I imagine it's an even simpler process for them to go through, without any checks or balances.



aciddrink

join:2000-08-26

1 recommendation

reply to gatorkram

Those are all valid questions, and ones I would like to find out.

If I were a betting man, I would say they will eventually begin hosting files in order to draw people in and log IP's. This is afterall, the easiest way to get their "job" done.

Do these firms get paid based on the quantity of people they "catch"/entrap?



mazhurg
Premium
join:2004-05-02
Portage La Prairie, MB

Surprize!

6 strikes model is perfect for the ISPs, who can refuse a free extra $35/user?

It's a perfect corporate world where even innocence must be purchased.



elios

join:2005-11-15
Springfield, MO
reply to gatorkram

Re: Oh boy...

yup totally couldnt fail in any way ..... RIGHT
i think a big I TOLD YOU SO is in order here to all the people that said it would effect people not pirating


clone

join:2000-12-11
Portage, IN

1 recommendation

reply to aciddrink

I doubt they would ever host the files, not for the purpose of suing the downloaders, anyway.

This stems from the fact that they try to falsely claim the huge damages (hundreds of thousands or millions of dollars) based on the fact that you were sharing it with a ton of people who potentially could download it.

If you download one copy, they can sue you for $14.95, or whatever the going rate of the DVD or album currently is. This is why they never sue downloaders, and always sue uploaders.



RWSI

join:2012-11-27
Albuquerque, NM

Disconnect

Just disconnect. After everyone has left and no one goes to the movies maybe they might get it?



ArrayList
netbus developer
Premium
join:2005-03-19
Evanston, IL

yep. that's the most rational, logical expectation ever.



cdru
Go Colts
Premium,MVM
join:2003-05-14
Fort Wayne, IN
kudos:7
reply to gatorkram

Re: Oh boy...

said by gatorkram:

I have always had the feeling, these people have no clue what they are doing.

They know what they are doing. They are putting minimal effort into a complex problem. They know that their detection methods are going to have a lot of false positives. But they don't care.

I asked a question a long time ago, in another post, about how these companies go about figuring out what you are doing, is even infringement.

If they are working on the behalf of the copyright owner and are authorized to "distribute" it (which their service agreement most likely stipulates) then it's not infringement on their behalf. They may be authorized to give up the content but the infringer isn't authorized to accept it.

Do they host the files themselves like a honeypot, and wait for people to connect, download and share, or do they just randomly look for files with particular names, and then join those swarms, and start collecting IPs, etc.

Both.

I wonder, how much you even have to share, before it becomes a violation, or how much of a download you have to complete.

Technically, anything not covered by fair use and is unauthorized is infringement, so 1 bit. But then you have the practicality of differentiating what's infringing content and what's just coincidence. While it doesn't make a legal precedence here, I believe a judge in the UK stated that it had to be the entire piece of work and that just a fraction of it was not sufficient. For torrent related cases, if there are multiple people in the swarm (most likely) then it would be near impossible to prove that an entire work was downloaded from a single source. And if an infringer advertised that he had 100% completion to accept requests, just saying you are offering the file I don't think is sufficient to argue infringement, the actual infringement has to happen.

All these uncertainties are why so very few copyright infringement cases go to actual trial. It's expensive, and the copyright holders also don't want to go through all the costs with legally dubious cases and little precedence to go upon.

OmagicQ
Posting in a thread near you

join:2003-10-23
Bakersfield, CA
kudos:1

Its a large download...must be pirated content!

I suspect this will start to be the case. Pretty soon they will be flagging people for downloading linux distributions as 'warez'
--
...Who, What, When, Where, How... Why? Why Not?


serge87

join:2009-11-29
Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS

said by OmagicQ:

I suspect this will start to be the case. Pretty soon they will be flagging people for downloading linux distributions as 'warez'

That would be pretty funny, especially since I download 80TB per month.

me1212

join:2008-11-20
Pleasant Hill, MO

I wonder how the game makers will/would respond to this?

Some companies love mods for games, some people will buy a game just because of a mod, and some companies(like valve) get some employees from the modding community. I really want to see how/if the gaming companies react to this.


mlcarson

join:2001-09-20
Los Alamos, NM

OTA violations

Here's why it's hard to take the whole DMCA thing seriously. When shows like House and Grimm are broadcast OTA and are readily available to record, why is it so wrong to transfer one of these recordings from one location to another for personal viewing? This used to be considered fair use.


slckusr
Premium
join:2003-03-17
Greenville, SC
kudos:1
Reviews:
·Charter

said by mlcarson:

Here's why it's hard to take the whole DMCA thing seriously. When shows like House and Grimm are broadcast OTA and are readily available to record, why is it so wrong to transfer one of these recordings from one location to another for personal viewing? This used to be considered fair use.

Im legally allowed to do that, If i capture it myself and move it to another device. Like when my DVR records the show and i watch it on my cellphone at work. I paid for that content to be saved at home so i can use it on MY other devices.


phxmark
What Country Are We Living In?

join:2000-12-27
Glendale, AZ
reply to mlcarson

Fair use has been dead for along time. Hollywood does not like time shifting. Look at how they are trying to kill off the Hopper and other DVR systems.
--
High speed is dangerous. Too many MP3s, not enough time.



jmn1207
Premium
join:2000-07-19
Ashburn, VA
kudos:1

Protests

Wouldn't it be in the DMCA's best interest to send out millions of false alerts to innocent people?

A person that legitimately violated copyright is not likely to pay $35 to protest, only the falsely accused have any reason to want to protest.

If there is no reciprocal punishment for blatantly false accusations, they may as well just send Guido and Big Tony door-to-door to shake up the locals for "protection" money.



Woody79_00
I run Linux am I still a PC?
Premium
join:2004-07-08
united state
reply to phxmark

Re: OTA violations

said by phxmark:

Fair use has been dead for along time. Hollywood does not like time shifting. Look at how they are trying to kill off the Hopper and other DVR systems.

this right here.

personally this is saddening...these people are destroying and butchering the Internet...mark my words in the next 20 years..the internet we knew..the free and open internet will be dead...bank on it...


Woody79_00
I run Linux am I still a PC?
Premium
join:2004-07-08
united state
reply to jmn1207

Re: Protests

said by jmn1207:

Wouldn't it be in the DMCA's best interest to send out millions of false alerts to innocent people?

A person that legitimately violated copyright is not likely to pay $35 to protest, only the falsely accused have any reason to want to protest.

If there is no reciprocal punishment for blatantly false accusations, they may as well just send Guido and Big Tony door-to-door to shake up the locals for "protection" money.

Of course!

this is the plan all along....that 35 dolalr fee is just s shake down...a way to extort or extract more money from the consumer...thats all it is...and one way or another...they will get that money from us...


Camelot One
Premium,MVM
join:2001-11-21
Greenwood, IN
kudos:1

1 recommendation

reply to aciddrink

Re: Oh boy...

said by aciddrink:

Do these firms get paid based on the quantity of people they "catch"/entrap?

A conspiracy theorist would point out that with the 6 strikes only generating letters and slow downs, the real money to be made here is actually in the false claims. Few will pay to protest being caught downloading something they know is a violation, but nearly EVERYONE who gets a false claim will pay $35 to prove they did nothing wrong. And it is my understanding that you are out the money no matter what the final ruling.


gaforces
United We Stand, Divided We Fall

join:2002-04-07
Santa Cruz, CA

1 edit

4 strikes?

So if the mod builder/distributor got dmca for those items listed, does that mean that person has 4 strikes already and have to pay 35x4=140?

I expect the mod builder could prove damages like loss of paypal donations or something.
Violation of the 4th Amendment (unreasonable search and seizure), and 3rd Amendment (freedom of speech.)

Since damages and punishment are so high it could be considered a capitol offence. There is all kinds of wrong with this.
Wronged people will seek redress. Theres gonna be a lot of lawyers on retainer for this mess.

And 6 strikes is voluntary? lolz


buzz_4_20

join:2003-09-20
Limestone, ME
reply to OmagicQ

Re: Its a large download...must be pirated content!

It must be, you're downloading it without paying somebody...

Where's my CUT says everyone.

I MUST SQUEEZE CONSUMERS FOR EVERY RED CENT, NO MATTER THE COST



skeechan
Ai Otsukaholic
Premium
join:2012-01-26
AA169|170
kudos:2
Reviews:
·Clear Wireless
·Cox HSI
·Verizon FiOS

What SHOULD happen...

You pay the $35 and if it turns out you are right, whoever filed the DMCA request pays a $1000 penalty for the false accusation.

In the meantime, how is being accused of a crime not defamation?

If I go about telling someone that you are a child molester you certainly could sue me for the defamation.



Kilroy
Premium,MVM
join:2002-11-21
Saint Paul, MN
reply to cdru

Re: Oh boy...

said by cdru:

said by gatorkram:

I wonder, how much you even have to share, before it becomes a violation, or how much of a download you have to complete.

Technically, anything not covered by fair use and is unauthorized is infringement, so 1 bit.

So, they have two files they are enforcing copyrights for, one has a first bit of 0 and the other has a first bit of 1, so EVERYTHING is a copyright violtion subject to a $35 review if you feel like paying for it.

In reality the more bad press this plan gets the better for consumers.
--
“Progress isn't made by early risers. It's made by lazy men trying to find easier ways to do something.” ¯ Robert A. Heinlein


EmoHobo

join:2010-07-16

2 recommendations

Bleeding us dry.

Guilty until proven innocent, that's the American Way now that Corporations control the country.



Octavean
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-31
New York, NY
kudos:1

If you're going to do it get it right,

False positives should result in a fine paid TO the falsely accused customer. I don't really care if they implement this CAS but if they are going to do it they need to get it right,....all the time,....or pay for their missteps,.....IMO.

That includes insecure and or hacked wireless networks.



JohnInSJ
Premium
join:2003-09-22
San Jose, CA

contents, not file name...

Does anyone know if the said file actually didn't contain one of the listed items in the DMCA notice? One would expect it's not looking for file names, but rather hashing content and matching hashes against a database.

It's not very hard at all to rename a file "I am not a pirated movie.txt" after all.
--
My place : »www.schettino.us


CXM_Splicer
Looking at the bigger picture
Premium
join:2011-08-11
NYC
kudos:2

1 recommendation

reply to clone

Re: Oh boy...

No, if they hosted a file that would be the equivalent to them giving away property they own. You cannot offer something for free and then claim infringement when someone takes it. They go after 'uploaders' because that's the only ones they can collect sufficient evidence on.



danawhitaker
Space...The Final Frontier
Premium
join:2002-03-02
Urbandale, IA

And this is why...

...my ISP, Mediacom, is a bunch of fools for having a 3 strikes and you're permanently disconnected policy. People stick up for the system, but scenarios like this show how someone could get screwed very easily, and good luck fighting your case with the ISP.
--
You're watching Sports Night on CSC so stick around...


FTWalker

join:2011-03-10
reply to jmn1207

Re: Protests

They might be taking a page from the Nigerian scammers and using the shotgun approach - send out mass quantities (emails/violations), and even if only a small percentage "bites", they're still way ahead monetarily.



Camelot One
Premium,MVM
join:2001-11-21
Greenwood, IN
kudos:1
reply to CXM_Splicer

Re: Oh boy...

said by CXM_Splicer:

No, if they hosted a file that would be the equivalent to them giving away property they own. You cannot offer something for free and then claim infringement when someone takes it. They go after 'uploaders' because that's the only ones they can collect sufficient evidence on.

You are half right. But with the torrent protocols, you are distributing (without permission) the moment you start downloading. So they can seed the file, and still nail you for distribution while you download it.
--
Intel i7-2600k /ASRock P67 Extreme4 /4x 4Gb G.Skill /2x Intel 510 series 250Gb SSD /3x WD20EADS 2TB /2x PNY GTX 260 /Silverstone 850W /Custom water cooler /Antec Twelve-Hundred