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. ..


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

Re: Oh boy...

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.
TechnoGeek

join:2013-01-07

Re: Oh boy...

Oh no penalty eh...

So what if I file a claim against them with their service provider? Or are business accounts exempt?

Either way, hmm....

aciddrink

join:2000-08-26

1 recommendation

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?
clone

join:2000-12-11
Portage, IN
Reviews:
·T-Mobile US

1 recommendation

Re: Oh boy...

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

1 recommendation

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.

Camelot One
Premium,MVM
join:2001-11-21
Greenwood, IN
kudos:2

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

Re: Oh boy...

They don't use standard torrent programs specifically because they make blocks available as soon as they are complete. They use custom programs which monitor the trackers and don't share anything.

If Honeypoting were legal, they would be going after the downloaders like that... not the uploaders. They would in fact be the uploaders which is why it doesn't work. If a defense lawyer found out a copyright holder was allowing the material to be given away for free the whole case would be thrown out very quickly.

Camelot One
Premium,MVM
join:2001-11-21
Greenwood, IN
kudos:2

1 recommendation

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.

aciddrink

join:2000-08-26

Re: Oh boy...

Exactly. It's an inherently flawed yet genius system. Throw around an extreme number of letters/notices, whether real or fake. Then sit back and enjoy the money that comes rolling in.

Kai

@teksavvy.com

Re: Oh boy...

I call that... A "Pyramid Lawsuit"!

1 uploader spreads to several, which spreads to more and more... And then they use it as a means to launch charges or lawsuits of the likes to funnel money to themselves.

Hope Dreyer

@verizon.net
Actually you get the $35 back, if they find you not guilty... Another reason for them to not find you not guilty.

Camelot One
Premium,MVM
join:2001-11-21
Greenwood, IN
kudos:2

Re: Oh boy...

said by Hope Dreyer :

Actually you get the $35 back, if they find you not guilty...

Please name your source, I have not been able to find anything stating that.

Hope Dreier

@verizon.net

Re: Oh boy...

"Finally, Lesser explained to Ars that consumers will have to pay $35 to the CAS to initiate a review procedure, which will be refunded if the consumer wins the review."

In »arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2012···cost-35/

As I said the fact that they, like the Spanish Inquisition, get to keep your money if they find you guilty indicates to me that they are unlikely to be finding to many people innocent.

elios

join:2005-11-15
Springfield, MO
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

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

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

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
Chubbysumo

join:2009-12-01
Superior, WI
Reviews:
·Charter
said by gatorkram:

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.

They hop on a torrent swarm, and then monitor what IP connect, and take a "snapshot" of the IP downloading something. A judge just ruled that their "evidence" is not even admissible in court, since it only shows the suspected criminal downloading a piece of the file(which is covered under creative use), and it does not reasonably identify the downloader, just the subscriber household.

BonezX
Basement Dweller
Premium
join:2004-04-13
Canada
kudos:1
said by gatorkram:

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

the "companies" are working on behalf of the copyright holder, which would allow them to honeypot and mass pull IP addresses. i know it looks seriously dirty to do(considering that you don't get the entire FILE from them, only a part realistically).

and remember, they are acting on behalf of the RIAA/MPAA so they don't have to sign contracts with actual artists to pursue people.

mazhurg
Premium
join:2004-05-02
Brighton, ON

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.
JTR

join:2012-05-19
Carbondale, IL

Re: Surprize!

If you are innocent, the $35 is refunded to you. I don't even think the fee goes to the ISP in the first place.

KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK

Re: Surprize!

Yes, because you should always have to answer false allegations by proving yourself innocent to the anonymous accuser, on your own time and dime.

That is written right into the U.S. Constitution, isn't it?
--
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." -- Benito Mussolini

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
Brighton, MA

Re: Disconnect

yep. that's the most rational, logical expectation ever.
dra6o0n

join:2011-08-15
Mississauga, ON
Reviews:
·ITalkBB
Nope, how corporate sees it is simply numbers, not a symbol or movement.

When a corporation sees profits go down and sees people not going to the movies, instead of thinking "why people aren't going to the movies" they are going to be discussing "How would we gain the income we 'lost'? Maybe scam or charge them for downloading movies?"...
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

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

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.

plencnerb
Premium
join:2000-09-25
Carpentersville, IL
kudos:3

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

Along those lines, how do they verify that what is being downloaded is actually the real thing.

For example, what if I created 300 txt files of popular music songs, had them named artist - song title . mp3, and made them about the right size.

But, in reality, they would not be what the file says they are. As I said, I would start with a text file, make it the right size, and rename it to .mp3.

If I was to do that, and host them, and people started to download them, would I get "flagged" as hosting "copyrighted material", when the files themselves was bogus?

--Brian
--
============================
--Brian Plencner

E-Mail: CoasterBrian72Cancer@gmail.com
Note: Kill Cancer to Reply via e-mail
Kearnstd
Space Elf
Premium
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ
kudos:1

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

said by plencnerb:

Along those lines, how do they verify that what is being downloaded is actually the real thing.

For example, what if I created 300 txt files of popular music songs, had them named artist - song title . mp3, and made them about the right size.

But, in reality, they would not be what the file says they are. As I said, I would start with a text file, make it the right size, and rename it to .mp3.

If I was to do that, and host them, and people started to download them, would I get "flagged" as hosting "copyrighted material", when the files themselves was bogus?

--Brian

Possibly yes. if the hash happened to be close enough to the database I bet the automatic system would fire off a DMCA notice to your ISP.

the DMCA has zero human oversight. Which is why false positives happen. NASA had part of a news conference on Livestream cut off once. They showed video of the curiosity landing and that triggered an automatic copyright system(because some news source also had that same video.)
--
[65 Arcanist]Filan(High Elf) Zone: Broadband Reports

noc007

join:2002-06-18
Cumming, GA
Reviews:
·Comcast

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

I remember a story where an original video was uploaded to YouTube. That video was later played by NBC Nightly News IIRC for some segment. A DMCA takedown was done on the original video and they never got permission to air the video anyways.

Seriously, it's out of control.

Hope Dreier

@verizon.net
Simply, yes.

buzz_4_20

join:2003-09-20
Limestone, ME
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
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.

••••

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

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...
FTWalker

join:2011-03-10
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.

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
TechnoGeek

join:2013-01-07

Re: 4 strikes?

Wait, if it's the mod developer's code, can't he technically sue them for infringing upon his distribution rights?

If they host it to catch people, he can hit them with a DMCA claim.

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.

••••

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.
dra6o0n

join:2011-08-15
Mississauga, ON
Reviews:
·ITalkBB

Re: Bleeding us dry.

Ya think?

At this point the country won't have much of a chance to change for the better, there are too many 'factors' preventing that from happening.

First - The banks.
This factors in a lot on how these 'bankers' and their group of people operate their money laundering schemes.

Second - The government.
This factor is reliant on the loans they take, and the bribes they gain, and the excuses they make.

Third - The corporations.
This factors in the most, but only because of the first two factors above has power. When greed takes hold of someone with power, greed takes hold of groups who interacts with someone who has power.

Simply revolting won't change the world, nay. This is something extremely complex that won't see change, in fact the only result in the end is the extinction of the country, either from a apocalyptic disaster or something in that level of destruction.

Rome ceased to be the greatest nation after it expanded and grew too big, and broke itself apart.

Why do people, like Americans, have to be prideful of their country? Because they've got nothing much else to take pride in. This factors them being unable to give up the illusions they live in.

Granted, no humans want to see reality as reality... The vision we see in the world is how we want to see it, because that's just natural to us.

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.
Expand your moderator at work

JohnInSJ
Premium
join:2003-09-22
Aptos, 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

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...

Probitas

@teksavvy.com

Roach Motel

Too bad you can't change providers if you get hit with challenge costs by mistake. As if you have to pay to prove your innocence. Hire a lawyer and sue for rights violations, and make THEM pay. Enough people get hit with those things for no reason and sue often enough, they'll drop it, the costs will be too high.
megarock

join:2001-06-28
Catawissa, MO

Gee...

Looks like it's class action lawsuit time. Anyone who gets a false claim against them should contact attorney firms. They'll sue anyone.
Kamus

join:2011-01-27
El Paso, TX

Where are the douchebags (and/or trolls) now?

Just a couple of days ago the douche-bags were calming that this would NEVER, EVER, EVER, EVER happen. (false positive)

Not only were they wrong, but it took no time at all for them to be wrong.
Kearnstd
Space Elf
Premium
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ
kudos:1

Something funny about copyright violations

Hollywood partly exists because film makers wanted to avoid paying licensing fees for the patents that Edison had on the process of making motion pictures.

It is kind of funny they cry about downloaders not paying, yet their industry is rooted in people not wanting to pay a license fee.
--
[65 Arcanist]Filan(High Elf) Zone: Broadband Reports