US House Of Representatives… Is A Rogue Site?
from the wouldn't-you-know-it? dept
As the US House of Representatives continues to push for SOPA to help go after foreign “pirates,” it appears that some folks at home were doing their own “research,” in a way. TorrentFreak, using the YouHaveDownloaded.com tool, have matched up the IP addresses owned by the US House of Representatives, and noticed that they’re downloading plenty of material that’s likely to be infringing. There are a lot of books, but also software like Microsoft Windows, and even some porn.
So when do we get to see the House of Representatives get listed as a “rogue site”?
Filed Under: congress, house of representatives, infringement, sopa
Comments on “US House Of Representatives… Is A Rogue Site?”
The article implies that Congress isn’t already rogue. :p
Re: Re:
When I found out that the U.S. congress had an 8 percent approval rate my first thought was, who in the hell are the 8 percent?!
Re: Re: Re:
Even Congresscritters have family and friends (well some have friends at least).
Add in the lobbyists, execs for the entertainment and oil industries, and all the financial institutions that got big handouts for wrecking the economy.
Re: Re: Re:
The 8% are the members of congress and their employees. Okay, well, maybe not their employees…
Re: Re: Re: Re:
The 8% are the members of congress and their bosses. FTFY.
The youhavedownloaded.com site has already been proven to be bogus; it told me that I lived in a town in another county, an hour away, and that I downloaded something I would never in a million years subject myself to listening to.
Have you ever thought of doing some real research, rather than simply spinning anything and everything that might help the pirate cause?
Re: Re:
WHAT? You mean an IP address doesn’t equal person and can be wrong?
You don’t say? We should inform your buddies at the MAFIAA about this startling discovery of yours.
Re: Re:
Have you ever realised that this points out just how flawed using an IP address is for actually identifying a person?
Re: Re: Re:
Who has denied that?
An IP address is only the first step in IDing someone.
Plus, Masnick himself admits that the address was also for free wi-fi; why even write such a blatantly intellectually dishonest and slimy headline when that is the case?
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Whoosh.
Wow. You are dense aren’t you?
Re: Re: Re: Re:
HAHAHAHAHA. Gold.
Re: Re: Re: Re:
You forgot jack boot and free speech.
Troll fail.
Re: Re:
“The youhavedownloaded.com site has already been proven to be bogus”
[citation needed]
(especially coming from an AC criticizing a less-anonymous entity)
“it told me that I lived in a town in another county, an hour away, and that I downloaded something I would never in a million years subject myself to listening to”
and a little bird told me that you simply made this whole thing up …
Re: Re:
Ever heard of DHCP?
Your anecdotal “evidence” that YouHaveDownloaded.com is “proven to be bogus” easily falls within the reasonable explanation that it logged a computer using the IP you have now in the location specified downloading the content specified.
Unless you’ve got some proof that your computer has had that IP address during the time specified then your argument comes off pretty weak. Can you back up your claim of “proven to be bogus” with solid data or citations of others with solid data?
Re: Re:
So…a tool that logs IP addresses and lists which torrent files it has downloaded is bogus…
What makes YouHaveDownloaded.com so different from what the RIAA/MPAA/ et al have been using?
Re: Re:
The location detection doesn’t invalidate the process. My IP address is always recognized as from a town other than my own. It all depends on what Whois database you are looking at and when it was last updated. That is the nature of rotating IP addresses.
Re: Re:
The methodology is good enough for the RIAA/MPAA. If it’s good enough for them, it’s good enough for us.
Re: Re:
“Hi, I don’t know what dynamic IP is so this site must be bullshit.”
FTFY
Re: Re:
Keep in mind that the lookup is IP based, if your ISP doesn’t give you your own IP address this sort of stuff happens
Why did you block out the last 3 of the Ip address?
Its not like I cant guess the IP address.
Guilt by IP?
So in many cases where a normal citizen is accused of infringe ment from an IP the people suing her do not care that it may have been someone else using it. They go after the owner. So in this case WHOSE IP was it, or it just an outward IP for Congress? In that case does it fall to the Speaker of the House? Shouldn’t the BSA be going after them as it does others for the same thing?
“The youhavedownloaded.com site has already been proven to be bogus; it told me that I lived in a town in another county, an hour away, and that I downloaded something I would never in a million years subject myself to listening to.”
HAHA, you just proved his point. The thousands and thousands of people who have been charged based on IPs are saying the same thing…
Re: Re:
yeah. But the House has static IPs. They don’t change.
Busted.
You know...
Well, there is legitimate reasoning for downloading Windows like that; what if you lost the CD? What if you DO have the license key?
Don’t forget; it’s a license, not a sale!(TM)
Re: You know...
Indeed! I used to own every CD and DVD for the music and movies I download, but they got lost… or destroyed!
That’s why I download them, I have the license to listen to them, I just can’t prove it cuz they didn’t come with a license key…
Actually, I’ve done this – but I do keep the destroyed DVDs and CDs to prove it 🙂
Re: You know...
Legit reason = I’m repairing a neighbors computer with vista home premium. Just has a restore partition that is borked with the rest of the hard-drive discs. So I download a clean version of the OS and use the license number on the sticker on the case and problem solved.
Re: You know...
So why does Microsoft bust any site that has links to OEM copies of Windows (any version) or any of the Microsoft Office applications/suites? Obviously M$ think that downloading is infringment, whether you are the local geek neighbour how fixes PCs or your Sentator/Congressional Rep.
Congress held accountable?
Heh – certainly you jest.
Two sets of rules, high court/low court, whatever you want to call it. Those who make the rules are exempt from them.
These same people wag their fingers at the rest of the world.
wtf
Yawn.
How about “investigating” online piracy?
How about “hacked computer”?
Come on tweedledum, if you are going to give everyone else in the universe all the outs, why pin them on it?
Are you that much of a vengeful fucker?
Re: Re:
“if you are going to give everyone else in the universe all the outs, why pin them on it?”
Yeah, do as I say not as I do … what’s wrong with being a hypocrite anyways … business as usual for the dicktatorz of policy. amirite?
Re: Re:
>How about “hacked computer”?
You realise that various people who’ve been dragged into litigation did try these defences, right? If you won’t accept it from them, why accept it from the House?
We’re not the “vengeful fucker”s. The MAFIAA’s the one who thinks that each download is a lost sale and in return, they must demand a pound of flesh. Who’s the vengeful one now, eh?
Re: Response to: Anonymous Coward on Dec 27th, 2011 @ 6:17pm
Have you stopped beating your customers yet?
Someone should send them one of those settlement letters. Turnabout is fair play, after all.
Re: Re:
Dear Senator [insert name here]
Your IP address was used to down load the following files.
Necro bestiality 4
Gay and straight men sex 5
Men Dressed as French Maids With Feather Dusters 2
Please note each one of these faces fines of $150,000 USD. We are seeking payment of $2,000 USD per infringement per film.
———————————–
The question is would they pay to prevent a court trial? Or would they attempt to outlaws this practice?
Guilty by Default
The replies here sum up the situation.
Say if this evidence wax only 60% accurate then the other 40% means you cannot accuse them. It does however make you suspect the House is full of infringers. They are bound to check.
They would of course reply “we did not do it” which is the same as many other people said. The only difference was their defence was ignored and they got the large fine.
Governments using 3-strike laws do like to say that being hacked is not an excuse when a person is responsible for securing their own system. An expert hacker outranking a computer newbie is ignored and this is why hackers like to point out the hypercritical nature of this belief by hacking this Government scheme. Hadopi was compromised three times so far and one of those wax serious.
So it is a fair story. Their number came up and they are guilty with all the flaws ignored. Their denial is then laughable in an ironic… yes we knew that as well.
Re: Guilty by Default
Is english your second or third language?
We could also declare it a rouge site, since the politicians should be red-faced after a gaffe like this, except that politicians have absolutely no shame.
so...
Has anyone in Congress etc been sued by the MPAA, RIAA? If not if they do this crap don’t you find it odd that they have not been sued?