Attempt To Trigger Six Strikes Comes Up Empty
from the this-time... dept
Right after the “six strikes” Copyright Alert System (CAS) launched, I heard from a few people saying that it was actually likely to increase their file sharing activities, in part because it clearly laid out the “risks” of doing so. In other words, rather than educating people that file sharing was “wrong,” the CAS seemed to clarify the actual risks involved. Of course, some of the CAS punishments can be somewhat severe, so I do wonder how accurate those predictions were. However, apparently some folks have tried and failed to get themselves a strike under the CAS system, according to a report in DailyDot (which, bizarrely, never seems to name who conducted the actual study). They chose some popular content — including some Rihanna songs, since Rihanna songs have been targeted under both France’s and New Zealand’s three strikes systems. They found torrents via The Pirate Bay, downloaded the works and then left the files available for weeks… and nothing.
Obviously, this is just one test on one ISP (Verizon) with just a few files. That’s hardly indicative of what’s actually happening with the overall CAS. However, it does make me wonder, if we start seeing more, similar reports, if it will lead more people to actually look at the whole system as making it more enticing to share files than before. Obviously, that would be the exact opposite of what the program’s supporters would like.
At the very least, however, it makes me wonder (yet again) why the industry is putting so much effort towards punishment and enforcement, and so little towards actually adding value and giving people good reasons to buy.
Filed Under: cas, six strikes
Companies: verizon
Comments on “Attempt To Trigger Six Strikes Comes Up Empty”
More Markets and Moar $$
Giving people a reason to buy content generates far less earnings than creating an industry around punishment and enforcement of the “stealing” of said content (which does not really cost anyone anything). They make $$ other ways with the content already anyway, so why not support both industries, as they appear to be doing now.
Re: More Markets and Moar $$
“(which does not really cost anyone anything).”
Except the poor schlub getting fined 1000s for downloading a few songs, that is.
Re: Re: More Markets and Moar $$
Who cares? Unless the backlash from the E&P is very severe, it is lucrative to pick up the lawyers needed to harness the tort-dollars.
Re: Re: Re: More Markets and Moar $$
And that right there is a nice summary of everything that’s wrong with the mainstream music industry.
Re: More Markets and Moar $$
(which does not really cost anyone anything)
There is a cost to this. Creating an industry around suing everyone in sight harms the company’s reputation, and drives people towards boycotting that company’s products. Look how many people have already decided to boycott anything by the major record labels, and spend their money with the independent record labels instead.
Re: Re: More Markets and Moar $$
Those people are vocal on forums, but probably represent a tiny minority… Most people don’t vote with their dollars.
Shrug, this “agreement” was made when sopa looked like a sure thing. Now that they see they don’t have nearly the support they expected, i doubt they will truly push it for fear of the customers.
Not that surprising
After all, if the history of the various ‘strikes’ programs is anything to go off of, there is nothing less likely to be caught than actual copyright infringement.
Publishers, and some creators, mistakenly equate control with profitability, as though the former guaranties the later.
The problem is, decades ago, it was mostly true. Consolidations put entire markets in the hands of a few publishers. Basically, all roads led through Rome; neither creators or customers could get much without dealing with these self-anointed emperors. But, just like the real historical dictators, they were blind to competing empires raising up around them–some outside their walls, some even from within. First, they ignored the threats these upstarts posed. Then they shunned their new rivals to downplay the threat and dissuade their supporters from switching sides. Then they tried “bargaining” with completely one-sided agreements designed to ultimately dominate, subjugate or destroy these opponents. And if that failed, their pursuit of power eventually rose to all out war.
These conflicts of media empires have been raising up for over a century. What these self-anointed emperors of olde don’t realize is that the world has changed. The old ways of maintaining control can no longer work when everyone can become a creator, a merchant or a distributor without their approval. Now, there are just too many competitors from outside markets, and within their own. Dominance is no longer assured by rote or decree, their worth must be proven year after year. Sadly, they used to do just that when they were the upstarts foraging new territories and vying for supporters. Do they remember remember how to compete, or will they merely cling to their old allegiances as their ramparts crumble around them?
Why innovate if you can litigate?
MAFIAA’s business model, plain and simple.
Re: Why innovate if you can litigate?
And Isay Fuck the MAFIAA ! I intend fully to never open up my Wallet to them for the rest of my life.I am done with MAFIAA and I will Purchase Local and Indie Non-MAFIAA Art.That is where my money will go.
As far as any MAFIAA Stuff I will buy you used and physical and that is only if I really feel like it.
The Dinosaurs must go extinct !
You wouldn’t ruin someone’s life for jaywalking.
Re: Re:
THE HELL WE WOULDN’T!
Re: Re: Re:
Count us in on that action
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Now now you two, that’s the FBI/DOJ’s job, your schtick is ruining people’s lives over watching a movie trailer on the ‘wrong’ site or playing music in a waiting room for a business.
Re: Re: Re:2 Re:
You have us confused with our spin off collection societies that change the names of songs to keep the royalties due, are unable to keep track of our members to pay them, and require members who wish to be paid to file all sorts of paperwork and finally a court case to maybe get paid.
Re: Re: Re: Re:
BREEEEEINSSS! zombie walk
Re: Re:
bullshit, this is merika, the land of “Everybody not wealthy is a criminal” jaywalking should be a felony, just as the prison lobby.
I won’t speak of the company name, because I don’t want the backlash to start, but one employee told me that while they “support” CAS (for one audience), they’re not enforcing it on their customers (the paying audience).
I’ve seen this system at work before. Let’s see, where was it.
Right! Politicians and copyright grandstanders push for all these laws, and most of us let them hem and haw, then ignore the final result!
Yeah, that’s it!
At least this system works better than CAS.
So let me get this straight. Offering songs a la carte for $1.29 or less after you’ve had an opportunity to preview 90 seconds of it is not a compelling legal offering? Oh, right, they also need to also make it DRM free and allow you to resell it when you don’t want it anymore. Or better yet, offer it to you for free and maybe you’ll buy a T-shirt or something down the road. Until then, it’s a pirate life for you.
Re: Re:
Your mom didn’t hug you alot as a child did she?
Music is pretty much ignored by 6 Strikes, the RIAA is shell shocked after their litigation campagin went so well for them.
The real focus is on TV and Movies, remember using a DVR is STEALING from their mouths.
Did you have a real point to make about a corporate legal system being forced upon consumers or were you just flailing wildly hoping to score points this morning?
Re: Re:
First Sale Doctrine still applies.
Re: Re:
You do realise CAS is all about accusations, and at no point is there a way for you to clear your name in a court of law? You can’t say I didn’t do it, because then you’ll be asked to prove a negative, which is impossible.
Re: Re:
Offering songs a la carte for $1.29 or less after you’ve had an opportunity to preview 90 seconds of it is not a compelling legal offering?
In a word: No.
$1.29, $.99, or even $.79 is not compelling. The price is astronomically high. The only reason it’s stuck so far is that for decades, people got used to paying $15-$20 (still greatly inflated, a.k.a. price fixing) for shiny plastic discs. But a copy of a bitpattern, transported over the internet, costs as close to zero as you can reasonably imagine, compared to a physical disc that had to be manufactured/pressed/packaged/shipped/distributed/retailed. The price of an mp3 is also astronomically high when you consider that to fill the capacity of a modern mp3 player or phone at those prices would cost around $16,000 (64GB, 4MB per song, $1 each).
So no, selling a non-scarce bitpattern at a price equivalent to physical items is not compelling. When the entire world could carry around in their pockets the sum total of human knowledge and culture, doing things like they were done in Pony Express days is insane.
Re: Re: Re:
If that we’re true, then any random bit pattern would suffice.
Checkmate. Now go get a life.
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Were*
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Could say the same to you, troll.
Go outside. I hear it’s sunny.
Re: Re: Re: Re:
What are you trying to argue? I can only think of one way to interpret your statement, and it goes something like:
“If the bitpattern of a song and a random bitpattern cost effectively zero, then they are interchangeable.”
My response would be that you are confusing price and value. The value of a random bitpattern is different from the bitpattern of a song. The value is also different to different people. That’s pretty much the basis of economics.
If that’s not what you’re arguing, please correct me and be clear in what you are conveying.
Re: Re: Re: Re:
A more reasonable price would be one that isn’t gouging: in other words, one that provides the same (already inflated) profit margin to the label. Without having to press records or DVDs, this price is substantially lower than $1.29.
Re: Re:
Not if it includes DRM, it isn’t. Even DRM-free, $1.29 for one song is pretty expensive.
I can’t ignore your pirate dig, though. If its’ not a compelling offer for me, I’m not going to pirate it. I’m just not going to buy it. (Why bother pirating when there’s more compelling and legal music available than I have minutes left in my life to listen to anyway?)
Of course, whether or not I pirate it, the end result to the labels is identical: they don’t get my money.
Re: Re:
One point you make caught my eye, You personally think it is wrong that any person should be able to seell on what they have legaly purchsed, So saying that i am startign a scrap yard and when you buy a new car please send me your old one, i wont pay you for it, as there is no right you want to sell it on. Also when you want to move, just hand over your house to me, i will dismantle it and use the materials i get to build something different to what you had , as it is not your land , you cannot sell it , i will just lay claim to it and pay the government taxes every year, so i will not be getting it free but i will not be paying you anything for your second hand goods….Seee how absolutely thick you sound, thick as two planks come to mind as the way to describe you.
The problem
I honestly believe Google beginning to make them compete is putting Six Strikes on hold.
Re: The problem
I think they are more concerned about the copyright troll(s) that are now demanding 6 Strikes counts while pursuing Does.
This opens an interesting question about how useful the data is in a court of law. They want to pretend the strikes system is perfect, but it won’t hold up.
But in the meantime Verizon has had at least 2 demands for 6 Strikes data on customers, not sure if they bothered to fight it or not.
I have only heard of one person that has gotten a strike. One of my students told me about his uncle getting a strike notice. His uncle only has one computer which is wired directly to the cable modem; he has no wifi at all. His uncle doesn’t torrent anything. His uncle’s activities online are mainly poker, email, youtube, and following some sports teams. His uncle doesn’t download any type of music, movies, or porn. He is a bit paranoid about getting viruses and only plays poker on one site that was recommended by a friend. And yet his uncle’s ISP accused him of downloading hiphop.
Re: Re:
That is the other problem is 6 Strikes covers SOME ISPs, others refuse to bother, and some other ones have their OWN systems in place to punish customers on accusations.
Some people think the DMCA notice that was being sent by an industrious troll is a strike.
The system is so flipping weird and results in different responses from each ISP its hard to know where anything is coming from anymore.
Re: Re:
I have to wonder, if enforcement is really this arbitrary then what value does this system have at all?
Re: Re: Re:
If by value you mean “how much is this going to increase profits for movie studios and the recording industry?” The answer is zero. The industry finally realized that it was not getting a positive roi on the money it put into lawsuits. The current industry strategy is to push off the monetary costs to others. In the case of 6 strikes the ISP’s and the accused are paying for most of the cost. The ISP’s agreed to this only after getting heavy pressure from the White House.
Re: Re:
I call bullshit. Big time bullshit.
Several years and millions of dollars of funding and the best that HADOPI can come up with is fining ONE person who didn’t even download the files in question. Upon being threatened by the new government and having their pay cut, HADOPI decides that the best thing to do is to send out MORE letters, hoping that no one else would realise that in the past they could have sent out far more letters and call on their bullshit.
Several years and millions of dollars of funding and the best that New Zealand’s system can come up with is one, maybe two people, and they’ve only downloaded one out of the three songs charged for – for which, they’re paying $600 which is never going to Rihanna.
Why are we expecting the American system to be any less inefficient, incompetent and downright fail?
The copyright business model
The whole reason these things keep coming up about copyright is because they try to sell the service after the content has been made available. It’s like a landscaping service coming to your home, mowing your lawn without being asked to, and then knocking on your door to demand that you pay them. The point is, if they wanted to be paid, they shouldn’t have done the valuable work for free. They gave away all the value in the content when they created it without being hired to do so.
So the proper solution to this is, make contact with the prospective client(s), settle on a price, do the work, collect payment. It’s a solid basic framework to build on.
I know someone who got dinged for downloading episodes of ‘big bang theory’. Which is kind of funny because it was what his wife asked him to download and the only thing he got caught on of some 30+ different shows.
The reality of the six strikes is that people actually willing to put effort into this aren’t deterred or going to get caught 6 times.
People who will get caught six times are people who aren’t try to not be caught, or people who can’t figure out how to stop someone else from using their connection.
The dedicated downloaders want this feedback and 5 freebie chances, 20 people can get 100 iterations of figuring out how to avoid strikes for illegal torrent downloads.
Home Networks
The subscriber of Internet Service becomes the suspect of copyright infringement. The subscriber connects wireless router with security enabled to create home network shared by each member of the household.
A company website contains a copyright notice with a product support link to a User’s Guide in PDF format. You download a copy of the User’s Guide on your workstation. The company packages a CD with a copy of the User’s Guide in PDF format. You contact the company to get written permission from the company so that you can print a copy of the document. You find no employee at the company has the authority to allow you to make a printed copy for use with the product that you purchased. When you print a copy of the User’s Guide on your home computer’s printer did you just become a criminal?
On Google website you obtain driving directions to some destination from your present location. When you print a copy of the driving directions did you just become a criminal?
In United States you are not permitted to make a backup copy of DVD movie you purchased. In Canada you are permitted to make a backup copy of DVD movie you purchased. You travel to Canada with your DVD movie and make a legal backup copy of DVD movie you purchased. No laws were broken until you cross the boarder from Canada to United States.
A federal judge rules on the merit of copyright infringement case based upon the content of one or two sentences of a 1,200 page bill that becomes law. Judges and lawyers will argue for decades without resolution.
Confused?
Re: Home Networks
Actually, you are. You are not allowed to decrypt the DVD, but you can certainly make a bitwise copy of it and back up the minority of DVDs that are not encrypted.
“why the industry is putting so much effort towards punishment and enforcement”
Why should it matter how much effort the industry puts into these things. It is not the job of industry to punish and enforce and to get legislation passed. So why are laws so greatly influenced by industry such that the industry would even bother making such attempts knowing that they could get results.
So... Sampling the ocean with a teaspoon proves whales a myth?
HAH! You pirates have “progressed” to making up your own anomalies!
“Obviously, this is just one test on one ISP (Verizon) with just a few files.” — OBVIOUSLY, MIKE? Do you actually understand that this “study” in no degree or manner supports ANY conclusion at all? What’s OBVIOUS is that you take this NON-DATA to attack copyright, and are HOPING for more illegal downloading!
Re: So... Sampling the ocean with a teaspoon proves whales a myth?
It does highlight the fact that the detection system used by CAS is not as infallible as we were told. These guys did everything possible to get caught…and they didn’t get caught. With this result, it obviously throws into question the accuracy of the notices given to other people.
Re: So... Sampling the ocean with a teaspoon proves whales a myth?
Well it is data, and it supports the fact the system is flawed.
It is not statistically significant however as it’s just one test on one ISP.
As stated in the article.
Not sure why you’d yell at him for stating the honest truth regarding the findings and then make an assumption on his personal state of mind.
But oh well, this is why you be crazy.
Re: So... Sampling the ocean with a teaspoon proves whales a myth?
My Steam library says differently, Blue.
CD Sales Are Down Because Technology Changed
Notice to RIAA: Employees of Apple changed the technology. This evil company changed the technology that caused the recording industry to suffer a drop in CD sales. Apple has a legal staff eager to defend the company’s right to introduce new technology. Consumers can hold about 3600 to 4000 songs on iPod nano with 16 GB of memory. You may find a jogger from the recording industry with Sony Walkman pulling a red wagon full of CDs but not me.
Re: CD Sales Are Down Because Technology Changed
Yeah, but it is a lot easier to blame pirates than it is to admit that your business model is flawed or that you totally missed the boat on changes in technology. If you are a studio exec you have to have some excuse to feed the shareholders. Pirates are an easy target, even if they aren’t the real problem.
Re: CD Sales Are Down Because Technology Changed
As I might have pointed out once or twice, the drop in sales of CD’s went along with the drop in sales of portable consumer cd players… yet those electronics manufacturers aren’t running around screaming piracy. They are rolling out new technology to give the consumer what they want at a price the market will bear when dealing with competition.
My take is that the ISPs and other supporters of six strikes want it known and publicized that people are being dinged, and in some cases cut off, as a result of being caught. They’re really not that interested in identifying and catching the worst offenders, as long as somebody is getting caught and people are hearing about it. A good analogy would be a highway patrolman who, each time he is ready to write another ticket, nabs the first unlucky passerby who is going even 1 mph over the posted speed limit, but doesn’t care how many others going 30+ mph over the limit aren’t getting caught or perhaps even ignores them because they’re harder to catch.
Poor Masnick. He’s been desperate for months to get something to criticize the six strikes enforcement program for, and this was the best he could muster. Such is the pathetic life of a piracy apologist that has been outwitted and doesn’t know it yet.
Re: Re:
He can criticize whatever he wants. Your just crying about him doing so. I haven’t heard of anyone who has gotten a strike either. You mad bro?
I cant imagine the arm twisting they had to do at an ISP level to get them to agree to selling out their own customers. Talk about a terrible way to run a business. The industry has to evolve because the next innovation in file sharing will not be traceable and you will truly be f’d.
Re: Re: Re:
The next innovation is all content being streamed instead of being available as files, and pirates will truly be f’d.
FTFY
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Do you even know what streaming is? You do know that still gets stored locally or else you wouldn’t be able to ‘play’ it right? Do you even know anything?
Re: Re: Re: Re:
The next innovation is trading disk drives like our parents did with tape recorders. That grinding you will hear is the sound of the RIAA gnashing their teeth as they realise that they couldn’t outlaw that decades ago and they won’t be able to outlaw it now. Have fun.
Re: Re: Re:2 Re:
Next innovation? I’ve been trading hard drives for years. Talk about being late to the party…
I tried very hard but then it hit me and I was like DOH! My ISP is not taking part in the six strikes.
Subscriber of Internet Service is Suspect
The subscriber of Internet Service becomes the suspect of copyright infringement. The subscriber connects wireless router with security enabled to create home network shared by each member of the household.
When your children, now adults, download movie the parent becomes the criminal. What is wrong with this picture?
Husband and Wife should not have children because your children could grow up to be criminals as adults.
Adding value
If you are interested in “adding value and giving people good reasons to buy”, please take a look at what we’re doing at Safe-Xchange. The file sharing community is not going to make the record labels and movie studios rich, but it is the best hope for people who are actually creating the content that is being shared.
Re: Adding value
OK i visited the site but i want to know can i download the content watch it then pay if i thought it was worth my time. If so this is what i have been waiting for, if i have to pay up front for music or video files then they need to go back to the drawing table, but it seems like a good idea, i would hope that if they have not already that tech-dirt would make a post about this as it is what i have always thought of as one of the ways to help artists.
That being said i hope that the big studios do not get into this and use it as another way to steal money generated by artists content.
I’d like to see it working so we can see if it’ll have the same downward effect it had in France. HADOPI was hugely successful in slashing piracy by half. And decreasing sales.
On the other hand, Netflix has been utterly successful in slashing movie piracy by a decent notch in the US. And it has nothing to do with punishment.
Look I know it is a bit late to say this…but the only reason CAS isn’t working is because BitTorrent traffic is typically tunnels P2P data connections…Peer 2 Peer networks are usually private connections that in a network of shared resources, only the computers connecting to that network may share it. CAS cannot decrypt the MD5Hashes that act as authentication keys to a BitTorrent because of the encryption used on them.