Network Analysis Reveals Apparent (And Legally Questionable) Attack On Torrent Networks
from the pirates-still-won't-pay dept
Last week, we talked about a Microsoft-funded operation calling itself “Pirate Pay” and claiming to shut down torrents of pirated films by poisoning the P2P network with false data. At the time, former BitTorrent VP John Pettitt had commented that their system sounds ineffective and potentially illegal. Now, an anonymous reader points us to an analysis by Poland’s Computer Emergency Response Team (CERT Polska) looking at a recent surge of anomalous data on the uTP torrent protocol, which sounds somewhat similar to the description of Pirate Pay. The bulk of the analysis is highly technical, and they offer a few hypotheses for what might be causing the anomalies, the strongest of which is that it may well be a large-scale attempt at disruption:
Data collected from public trackers support this hypothesis. Without delving into details of torrent client reactions it’s plain to see that trackers register small amount of peers downloading analysed resources. It’s possible that it’s an effect of a process which we are currently unable to understand fully and which produce the anomaly. At least one interest group that would benefit from uTP poisoning is easy to point at: multimedia companies and their subcontractors. Conduction of this kind of campaign by these institutions wouldn’t be precedent. It’s also possible that generated traffic is used for BitTorrent network mapping and data gathering for later use in other projects.
Whether this uTP anomaly is directly related to Pirate Pay or not, CERT Polska reaches a similar conclusion about its legality:
Anomaly through it’s nature (large share in daily network traffic) produces visible disruption in IT systems and large amount of our false-positive high-level alerts is a good proof. In terms of Polish law, European Convention on Cybercrime and U.S. Codes (and probably many other sources of domestic law) legality of process producing the anomaly is questionable.
If it’s true that the big anti-piracy players are attempting a full-scale network attack on piracy, it’s actually kind of funny. Resorting to potentially illegal tactics to combat illegal behaviour doesn’t do anything to make people respect copyright—it just galvanizes the idea that it’s a battle for control. More importantly, the people working to preserve the network will always be more skilled and more numerous than those working to disrupt it, so the best this can do is give them a chance to hone their skills and shore up security.
Filed Under: cert polska, john pettitt, torrents, utp
Companies: bittorrent, microsoft, pirate pay
Comments on “Network Analysis Reveals Apparent (And Legally Questionable) Attack On Torrent Networks”
when something is used against various industries, it is always labelled as ‘illegal’. when it is the same thing done by the industries, it is labelled as ‘questionable’. how can it be illegal to disrupt one way, but legal the other? someone like to explain that to me, please?
Re: Re:
it is all based on who has money….and mirrors…lots of mirrors….and some cute and fluffy bunnies…awww…
I wouldn’t be too quick to jump to conclusions.
I recommend everyone to actually go read the report. It’s a rather interesting read (especially if you are a geek like me) and they present various hypotheses for the source/cause of the attack.
That said, I would not be surprised if this was really part of a coordinated attack perpetrated by the multimedia industries, and it would be “funny” if they got caught disrupting communication networks.
If it’s an uTP issue then a temporary solution would be to disable it, right? Also, it may be just me but I haven’t seen any drop in the speeds of any torrent from TPB for instance (I add well known open trackers after adding the magnets).
Did anyone else feel it? I’m obviously talking about MAFIAA content torrents.
Re: Re:
how could I possibly notice anything on d3 release week?
Maybe in a month I will need a break from diablo and seek other forms of entertainment again..
Re: Re: Re:
There’s life beyond hell, sonny. I’ve downloaded the last few episodes of Game of Thrones at blazing fast speeds (10mb/s and over), I also downloaded one Windows 7 copy these days after the Pirate Pay article (my LEGIT DVD is unreadable for some mystic reason). I also downloaded a few music albums but I’m not sure if they are copyrighted as the artists made them available on purpose…
Re: Re: Re: Re:
I don’t have that problem with Linux, of course I have others but nothing a redownload can’t do it, I have infinite backups on the internet for Linux hurray!
The one thing that drove me away from Windows was the day I bought a legit copy of Windows XP and tried to switch the language of it and was told to pay a $100 bucks more for the “PRO” edition or something like that I can’t remember, boy I was sad that day, at every turn there was somebody telling me I had to pay more for some little detail, there was no choice and then somebody told me to try Linux as a loyal Windows user I thought I was going to die, how could I leave my beloved Windows and start on that filth called Linux? with shame I download a copy of Ubuntu, it didn’t install for some reason, at this point I was almost giving up it was to difficult I couldn’t understand what all that talk about partitions LV2, GRUB, repositories was all about, but I do have a character flaw, do not ever challenge me to do something, I will die trying to make it happen no matter how much it costs me personally and that seemed to me like a challenge, I was decided to make Linux work and then go back and tell the horror stories about how crude and awful it really was, but instead of using Ubuntu I tried another one, PCLinuxOS that I found on DistroWatch after having typed “Linux Distribution” in Google.
To my surprise following the instructions it installed without a hitch on the first try, later I learned that my video drivers where the problem with Ubuntu and if I just have used the normal ones it would have worked at the time I was using and ATI card and ATI has a poor record of support for Linux.
After that I installed hundreds of Linux distribution and it grew on me, I no longer feel ashamed of the little penguin, I have learned to understand how it works and love it, even though is not perfect but it also doesn’t great me with a “pay or else” message either so there is that LoL
Re: Re: Re:
You’re playing that crap?
“Hey, guize, We just added a few things so pay lots of cash for it,’kay?”
Re: Re: Re: Re:
sure they didn’t add anything to gameplay to make it be anymore of a game…. but they made it look super sweet!
Re: Re: Re: Re:
You’re playing that crap? “Hey, guize, We just added a few things so pay lots of cash for it,’kay?”
Well, maybe he downloaded a cracked copy of d3 from uTP.
If not, how is the DRM treating you because I’ve heard pretty constant complaints from those stupid enough to buy it that the DRM sucks?
Re: Re: Re:2 Re:
I didn’t play it as soon as I heard “always-on”. Even Steam doesn’t make always-on a requirement to play solo.
Re: Re: Re:2 Re:
See http://www.cracked.com/blog/5-reasons-diablo-iii-represents-gamings-annoying-future/
Plus, we’re also looking at http://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain/2012/05/21/breaking-blizzard-diablo-iii-player-accounts-hacked-items-and-gold-stolen/
Re: Re: Re:3 Re:
I would counter this with the fact that Mechwarrior Online will be a free-to-play game. Like World of Tanks/Airplanes/Waships.
(The latter two are in beta testing, and coding, respectively.)
Re: Re:PB
TPB was down for two or three days and I’ve had several links that took hours to start when TPB said that there were hundreds of peers.
Re: Re: Re:PB
But did you add any public tracker or relied on DHT/PEX alone? Did you have uTP enabled? I’m using both put.io and my home connection. At home I have uTP disabled since I don’t need any sort of packet management (and correct me if I’m wrong but uTP is a protocol designed with that in mind for the torrent network). I’m wondering, if this management is done locally (and possibly broadcast so the other clients know about your condition) how can one use it to disrupt a network?
Re: Re: Re: Re:PB
According to Wikipedia, the main purpose of uTP is to regulate the torrentz’s bandwidth hogging so that your browser doesn’t completely freeze while you have Torrents downloading/uploading.
Sounds like a decent thing. Probably not vital though, I guess you can disable it if you really want that episode of X right now and aren’t actively browsing the internet.
Re: Re: Re:PB
TPB was down for two or three days and I’ve had several links that took hours to start when TPB said that there were hundreds of peers.
That was a DDOS against TPB, and possibly their tracker. It is widely assumed to be an attack by a member of Anonymous.
actually the entire situation is 100% false
just using peerblocker, all of companies who are funded by MS to “take down torrents” get blocked and ignored by the p2p blocklist in peerblocker every time.
So this hype about “oh we can take down torrents”? absolutely false.
Re: actually the entire situation is 100% false
They may have some luck when they get new IPA ranges, but they’ll get picked up quick enough.
Re: actually the entire situation is 100% false
You don’t know what you’re talking about. Peer blocker isn’t a magical solution that can stop any kind of attack.
IP filtering (this is what peer blocker does) is largely useless against attacks where the IP address is spoofed for attack packets. It might help in blocking some IP addresses of nodes used to gather data/targets for attacks but those aren’t easy to identify.
However, if it is some kind of attack, I doubt there wont be a defence.
I don’t see much to worry about until quantum computers comes out, only a few can afford them and media companies buy one/purchase time on one to generate hash collisions so that they can poison torrent data on a huge scale.
Re: Re: actually the entire situation is 100% false
I don’t think you understand how quantum computers (kind of) work.
Re: Re: Re: actually the entire situation is 100% false
That’s not fair.
There is a potential for him knowing, not knowing, or somewhere in between.
😉
Re: Re: Re: actually the entire situation is 100% false
On the contrary, NP hard problems like finding a hash collision are the exact type of things quantum computing would shine at.
Re: Re: Re:2 actually the entire situation is 100% false
Ah
I misread the comment. You’re right of course. However, once quantum computers are adopted on a mass scale, there will be new cryptographic and verification techniques available too.
Re: Re: actually the entire situation is 100% false
Umm, maybe you don’t understand things, but you can’t block a torrent successfully by simply continually spoofing IP addresses – people won’t even connect to you and BT is designed to refuse a client if they give you corrupt/bad data (and discard the data). Even if you’re rotating IPs on a 10 minute interval or something really short, you’re also reducing the effect of trying to prevent the torrent from functioning.
If you’re referring to faking torrents where they show thousands of users when there’s none, that also doesn’t do squat.
Also, what is this garbage. Hash collisions for
BT don’t even matter, either. At best if you can create a hash collision that’s on a SINGLE swarm. You could have the same bittorrent file shared across hundreds of different swarms at the same time, so even taking out a thousand swarms will not simply “stop the file from being shared”.
It is somewhere between improbable and impossible to prevent a file from being shared on BT, it’s just a question of how hard it is to find.
Re: Re: Re: actually the entire situation is 100% false
You’re not thinking it through. Were it me, I’d scrape all the peer addresses and start spoofing bad data that appears to come from them. You stop the torrent from functioning by tricking the clients into blocking the legit peers.
Re: Re: actually the entire situation is 100% false
Also, spoofing IPs and such as you described are actually illegal in the US and considered hacking and can get you 10-15 in prison…Just sayin.
Re: Re: Re: actually the entire situation is 100% false
Illegal for who, exactly?
The battle
“Resorting to potentially illegal tactics to combat illegal behaviour doesn’t do anything to make people respect copyright?it just galvanizes the idea that it’s a battle for control”
This is a point that needs some comment. There is a Battle but to be honest the battle was won many years ago with the creation of the internet.
The “Industry” had complete control over the distribution of artists creations, they said what could and could not be played on the radio and still have that power, they said what content could and could not be played in movie theaters they still have that power, they determined when and how people watched or listen to any of there artists content at home or on the move, they lost that ability totally when technology allowed people to record from radio and with the vhs machines from tv.
The internet made all of that so easy that now instead of having all the trouble of setting up for recording from radio or tv and waiting for the content you wanted to be aired, we can simply click on 1 magnetic link and a movie or music file can be downloaded in a very reasonable time.
No programming , no bad signal problems, no advertisements breaks that you had to edit out previously.
The Industry does not accept that they have lost the Battle and they are like a terrorist group, attacking small groups of people or individuals in an attempt to scare everyone away from using the systems that have developed to make things easier.
I have said before in the comments ,All of this revolves around a few power hungry people that can see there power slipping away from them and they are scared that they will, or have, become insignificant to almost everyone.
The only people that still bow down to them and lick there shoes to get a contract are people that do not believe in there product being of such a high quality that they will accept very restrictive agreements just to make a bit of money and possibly become famous.
Or people that just expect to make millions without actually putting in much time or effort to do so.
Re: The battle
With regards to the movie theaters, they are losing that power. It is slow, and doesn’t happen often, but there is at least one well-published example where an unrated movie is being made available in theaters. The industry controls the ratings, not the theaters.
What about the TOS
If Pirate Pay is violating anyone TOS, then shouldn’t those people behind Pirate Pay be charged with computer hacking? Isn’t that what the government would charge us with if we violate a TOS?
Re: What about the TOS
I don’t think that the Hacking charge works like you think it does.
Ultimately they are hosting magnet links and no actual software. And that’s why being pissed off at them is ultimately futile. Remember that whole discussion about making links (Remember the signposts?) illegal?
Re: Re: What about the TOS
John Doe is talking about Pirate Pay, not TPB. 😉
Re: What about the TOS
Pirate Pay is a Russian company, beyond the reach of US law enforcement. Another one of the unintended consequences of SOPA’s demise.
Re: Re: What about the TOS
Pirate Pay is a Russian company, beyond the reach of US law enforcement. Another one of the unintended consequences of SOPA’s demise.
How would an American law possibly effect a Russian company? Not that SOPA would have helped since clearly those who bought SOPA (and are now upset that their money wasn’t well spent,) are the same ones who are paying Pirate Pay to do what they’re doing now. I suspect that if American financial organizations stopped processing the Russian companies’ payments, they’d just switch to a foreign payment processor who doesn’t have any requirement to follow SOPA.
Re: Re: What about the TOS
“Pirate Pay is a Russian company, beyond the reach of US law enforcement. Another one of the unintended consequences of SOPA’s demise.”
Would this be the same “beyond the reach of US law enforcement” as Megaupload or Richard Dwyer (I can’t remember if that’s his name or not, but I believe it is)?
Would this be the same type of foreign company that can have it’s assets and websites seized at the whim of the RIAA/MPAA… ahem… I mean the U.S. government?
Because as far as I can tell, there are no unintended consequences of SOPA’s demise. Especially not in light of the fact that even without it, they are still doing things that would ONLY (supposedly) have been allowed under SOPA. So looks like SOPA is very much alive and well, in spirit if not in actual body.
Clearly the IPS:s are to blame. Think about it, the multimedia companies couldn’t possibly perform these illegal attacks if they weren’t enabled by the infrastructure put in place by the ISP:s. The ISP:s are cognizant of the fact that their infrastructure is used for illegalities and if they do not take action against them they should be held responsible for them.
Re: Re:
Thanks!
My sarcasm meter just blew up..
*grumbles*
Re: Re:
Clearly the IPS:s are to blame.
Sarcasm aside, ISPs have even found a way to profit from “alleged” attempts at “piracy” (Isn’t there a law against profiting from attempted lawbreaking, civil and/or criminal?):
Kazaa code rises from ashes to help ISPs block pirated material for profit
May 23, 2012
ISPs will also be able to inject their own contextual ads into search results.
The people behind a company once accused of being complicit in copyright infringement through peer-to-peer filesharing are now selling software that blocks pirated content?and gives Internet service providers a way to make cash in the process. And soon, a version of the same technology could be used by ISPs to inject their own advertisements into search results?a capability that is sure to raise the ire of proponents of network neutrality.
Global File Systems LLC, a subsidiary of Kazaa owners Brilliant Digital Entertainment Inc. (BDE), have developed software that combines a database of ?known bad files? with Web filtering technology at the ISP?s firewall, allowing ISPs to intercept and change links in search results being passed back to a user?s PC?and sending searchers to sites where the user can pay for legitimate copies of the content.
…
But what may be the most controversial version of the Global File Registry product is yet to come. Speck says Global File Systems is preparing a version for the US market that allows ISPs to intercept contextual ads in search results and inject their own advertisements in their place. ?At the moment, ISP operators invest in the network, acquire customers, and just open the window to the Internet, allowing other people to push advertising down customers?s throats,? Speck said. ?We believe it?s incongruous that ISPs should just open the window and allow them to force-feed advertising,? rather than getting their own advertising revenue, he explained.
Speck calls the software ?an ISP packet-adjusted advertising platform,? and says it relies on the same technology as the anti-piracy software. ?Relying on that same technology, we have been able to replace a search engine or website?s advertising with the ISP?s own advertising,? he said. But he added that ?we?re not suggesting we can forensically remove and replace every advertisement from every webpage??the technology is specifically targeted at search-based ads ?of a certain category.?
All I can say to that is: “Lawyarrs! To yarr lawsuit cannons! Preparr farr all out court warfarrr! They be steeelin’ yarr ad revenue!”
> More importantly, the people working to preserve the network will always be more skilled and more numerous than those working to disrupt it, so the best this can do is give them a chance to hone their skills and shore up security.
They also have the root keys to the Internet.
The people working to preserve the network include the backbone network operators (whose job is to keep the backbone networks working). A large-scale network-wide disruption is not going to amuse them. In the worst case, they can blackhole your network.
Re: Re:
In the worst case, they can blackhole your network.
Correct. That’s why things like http://www.spamhaus.org/DROP/ exist. (There are many others. Most of them aren’t public.)
The squabbling parties are free to bicker all they want, litigate all they want, politicize all they want, but when they go after infrastructure, we are not amused.
Resorting to potentially illegal tactics to combat illegal behaviour doesn’t do anything to make people respect copyright?it just galvanizes the idea that it’s a battle for control.
It’s evident that many, many people do not respect copyright and use torrents to get copyrighted content for free. So what is the point of playing nice?
Re: Re:
If the MAFFIA wants to go that route, I don’t think they’d like the results.
Re: Re:
It’s evident that many, many people like to state assumptions as facts
Re: Re:
Your comment only makes sense if the MPAA began playing nice to begin with.
It started out with the suing of home users for commercial copyright infringement with questionable reliability standards.
Re: Re:
The point of playing nice is setting an example. If the people in the right, we’ll pretend the copyright holders are all saints for the sake of argument, are doing ILLEGAL things, then why should others care what is legal or illegal regarding what they may or may not do? By “they” I mean the people infringing on copyright and what have you.
Either you follow the rule of law or you don’t. You can’t complain that others are doing illegal things (downloading your songs or movies) and then go about doing something illegal yourself to try and stop that. It sets a bad example and just shows others your true colors.
You can’t have it both ways. Play the victim and ask the government to create laws to protect you one moment, then turn around and pay people out of the country (and reach of U.S. law enforcement… HAHA!) to commit illegal acts on your behalf to teach those people victimizing you a lesson.
See, this is what I like about some ACs on this site. They take this very moral high ground against piracy and claim all of us here are dirty, dirty thieves and freetards and pirate apologists. But when the people they support cheat artists, it’s the artists fault. When the people they support violate due process, it’s okay because they’re the victims. When the people they support commit illegal acts in direct violation of the law, well… you guys (pirates and freetards and pirate apologists) started it.
The hypocrisy is so thick I’m surprised they’re even able to hit the keys on their keyboard and use their mouse to click submit. But as I said, it’s amusing because it shows they’re true nature. And they wonder why people turn against them. It’s almost laughable.
Re: Re: Re:
Just wanted to clarify I wrote this comment, as is evident by the “snowflake” but used a different name for a moment as a way of showing how laughable the previous ACs comment was in light of the situation. The “good guys” are doing illegal things and that’s okay in his book because they’re not the ones downloading movies/songs. Lol.
Re: Re: Re:
The point of playing nice is setting an example. If the people in the right, we’ll pretend the copyright holders are all saints for the sake of argument, are doing ILLEGAL things, then why should others care what is legal or illegal regarding what they may or may not do? By “they” I mean the people infringing on copyright and what have you.
First of all, Marcus suggesting that it may be illegal does not make it so. What if it’s legal in Russia? Will the defenders of Roja, Megaupload and the O’Dwyer kid step up to defend Pirate Pay… if they’re even involved?
Either you follow the rule of law or you don’t. You can’t complain that others are doing illegal things (downloading your songs or movies) and then go about doing something illegal yourself to try and stop that. It sets a bad example and just shows others your true colors.
Again, you’ve made an assumption that is enormous. I don’t know Russian law and I’m pretty sure you don’t either. Marcus I am sure of.
You can’t have it both ways. Play the victim and ask the government to create laws to protect you one moment, then turn around and pay people out of the country (and reach of U.S. law enforcement… HAHA!) to commit illegal acts on your behalf to teach those people victimizing you a lesson.
You [apologists] can’t have it both ways. You can’t snivel about the content companies getting the benefit of IP law enforcement and condemn them for spending their own money to stop the theft of their copyrighted content. The Google-led coalition killed SOPA which would have allowed US content companies to reach foreign based rogue site operators. Now they are using foreign based companies to disrupt infringement. If that’s the way you want it, that sounds like a logical next step to me.
See, this is what I like about some ACs on this site. They take this very moral high ground against piracy and claim all of us here are dirty, dirty thieves and freetards and pirate apologists. But when the people they support cheat artists, it’s the artists fault. I agree substantially with the former, but I believe that when the labels/studios cheat people they should be held accountable. You should realize that these days, everyone has an agent/lawyer. These are sophisticated business dealings. Not some rube being hustled by a city slicker.
When the people they support violate due process, it’s okay because they’re the victims. When the people they support commit illegal acts in direct violation of the law, well… you guys (pirates and freetards and pirate apologists) started it.
Due process is owed only by the government’s judicial process WTF are you talking about? And what illegal acts? No competent authority has made such a determination. And no, Masnick’s ventriloquist dummies don’t count.
The hypocrisy is so thick I’m surprised they’re even able to hit the keys on their keyboard and use their mouse to click submit. But as I said, it’s amusing because it shows they’re true nature. And they wonder why people turn against them. It’s almost laughable.
Here’s the hypocrisy, when pirates use the cloak of foreign jurisdiction to conduct their activities Techdirtbag Nation rallies in support. When the MPAA does it Techdirtbag Nation shrieks in bogus indignation and self-righteousness- now that is HYPOCRISY!
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Sounded to me like it was a general statement, not necessarily specific to the PP/TPB speculations. The users of one or both may or may not be legal in any number of countries, or the actions of either “party” are ignored or laws simply unenforced. Which is exactly why some industries and governments want to foist upon the world things like TPP, ACTA, SOPA, PIPA, whateva. And if, for instance, the USTR pushed through the TPP without puvlic or Congrssional oversight, this would also be illegal.
The sort of thinking you are advocating is exactly what got us two radically destructive, stupid, pointless wars after 2001. Because the only way idiots know how to deal with a problem is Hulk smash! Regardless as to whether they even have a valid target, or if their actions only make things worse. They simply do not care. They are diseased by an authoritarian mindset, and they are as bad or worse than their chosen enemy.
(Note that their “targets” are not exactly tightly coupled with their “enemy”, which is not necessarily tightly coupled with their “problem”. And outside their little special interest group, this is a huge part of the problem they cause. Being stupid, brutal, and ineffective has consequences.)
Re: Re: Re: Re:
“What if it’s legal in Russia? Will the defenders of Roja, Megaupload and the O’Dwyer kid step up to defend Pirate Pay… if they’re even involved?”
Why do you bring up that point? What does it matter? What’s legal elsewhere DOESN’T seem to matter to you most of the time. Or else we wouldn’t need to bring up that O’Dwyer kid now would we? What he did was perfectly LEGAL in his country, yet he’s being extradited because what he did though legal where he did it is illegal in the U.S.
“Again, you’ve made an assumption that is enormous. I don’t know Russian law and I’m pretty sure you don’t either. Marcus I am sure of.”
Well, you see there you go talking down to me for making an assumption yet there you go making one about Marcus. See how this works? Think before you speak. You wag your finger about one action, while doing or condoning a similar one. It’s okay when you or your side does it, but damn the torpedoes if others do it.
Again, hypocrisy being exposed there. It’s all fun and games til someone turns it around on you, then you try and spin things. Either you support law and order all over the world, as absolute and ridiculous a view as that might be, or you don’t. If someone doing something illegal here, which may be legal in Russia is okay, why is O’Dwyer different? Or is it because his website allowed people to comment on it and put links to material that may be copyright infringing?
“You [apologists] can’t have it both ways. You can’t snivel about the content companies getting the benefit of IP law enforcement and condemn them for spending their own money to stop the theft of their copyrighted content. The Google-led coalition killed SOPA which would have allowed US content companies to reach foreign based rogue site operators. Now they are using foreign based companies to disrupt infringement. If that’s the way you want it, that sounds like a logical next step to me.”
I’m not an apologist (see how you jumped right to that remark, did I have you figured out early on or what). Nor am I sniveling about anything. I am merely pointing out the hypocrisy on the part of the content industries. And as has been repeatedly stated, and I’ll say it again, theft implies depriving someone of something. That’s the long and short of it. Making a copy of a song or movie ADDS a copy to the world. Thus no theft is occurring, copyright infringement is another story, but theft… nope.
I almost pity you. Almost. You still believe SOPA being killed was all part of some grand plot orchestrated by those fiends at Google. Lol. I don’t even need to say any more on that. It’s cute how naive and/or stupid you are.
You ever hear of the expression, “An eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind”? If that’s the way you want it, eh? Glad to see that’s the type of person you are, along with those you seem to think are victims.
“I agree substantially with the former, but I believe that when the labels/studios cheat people they should be held accountable. You should realize that these days, everyone has an agent/lawyer. These are sophisticated business dealings. Not some rube being hustled by a city slicker. “
And yet, despite everyone having an agent/lawyer these days we still routinely see the labels abuse their power and cheat those they claim to be protecting and standing up for. How very odd. So pirates are bad, right? Yet if the artists get screwed, well… they had lawyers and agents, guess they didn’t do their job well? That about sum it up?
“Due process is owed only by the government’s judicial process WTF are you talking about? And what illegal acts? No competent authority has made such a determination. And no, Masnick’s ventriloquist dummies don’t count. “
Look, if you can’t have a conversation without getting as riled up as you apparently are (and it’s easy to tell when someone is riled up… I pushed so many of your buttons with one comment, I’m surprised I can’t see the steam coming out of my screen from your comment) and without resorting to making ad homs, maybe we shouldn’t talk. I’m trying to be polite and act like an adult, not some kid on the playground.
“Here’s the hypocrisy, when pirates use the cloak of foreign jurisdiction to conduct their activities Techdirtbag Nation rallies in support. When the MPAA does it Techdirtbag Nation shrieks in bogus indignation and self-righteousness- now that is HYPOCRISY!”
The pirates aren’t using the “cloak of foreign jurisdiction”. The fact of the matter is, the United States isn’t the world. Shocking as it may be. Some people do live elsewhere in countries whose laws are not those of the United States. Now what may or may not be legal elsewhere might piss you off to no end, but that’s your problem. You don’t like the laws in Country A, B, C or D… well, move there and start working to have them changed as a citizen of said country. But emphasis on “citizen of said country”. I didn’t say lobby to those in power in YOUR country to put pressure and force the lawmakers of other countries to make laws as YOU deem them fit.
I assumed you read TD regularly til I read your last comment. Or you’d realize their is no “bogus indignation and self-righteousness”, but if there is it’s not on our part. Ahem. [points at you] Crying about trillions in losses despite having a record breaking year? Sound familiar? That fits what I just quoted. No sir, the hypocrisy isn’t on the part of myself or the other “apologists” as you so quickly labeled everyone here.
This has been kind of fun. I so rarely get to push people’s buttons online. You posed no challenge. Hey, what are your views on religion? I bet I could make your head boil talking about that. Perhaps politics. Come on, let’s play!
Re: Re: Re:2 Re:
I almost pity you. Almost. You still believe SOPA being killed was all part of some grand plot orchestrated by those fiends at Google. Lol. I don’t even need to say any more on that. It’s cute how naive and/or stupid you are.
Anyone who was really involved in the fight knows who the General was. Doubtlessly you were chanting slogans and signing positions. For your edification:
http://www.fastcompany.com/most-creative-people/2012/marvin-ammori
This is Google’s guy. He was the man. The article actually understates his role. I don’t know a lot about his previous campaigns, but he was outstanding on SOPA. FYI, the insurgency was as organic, authentic and grassroots as the mourners at at North Korean state funeral. You got used and maybe you’re fine with that. But at least realize who called the tune and who danced to it.
Re: Re: Re:3 Re:
And the highlight of his campaign was feeding those 70+ amendments to delay Smith’s markup. If that markup had been concluded, the bill would have been signed by now. The votes were there. Great move on his part, that was the turning point. And all that was left was for the Google proxies to inflame their constituents and the battle was won.
Re: Re: Re:3 Re:
So I guess the fact that Google got dragged into things much later means nothing to you. It was way later when Google finally and reluctantly took a stance. Your crackpot conspiracy link notwithstanding. (I did take a gander at it. I find it amusing that anyone would believe that one person single handedly took down a bill, much less orchestrated a vast globe spanning initiative to take it down. Which that link pretty much states as having happened. Then again, some people think Obama faked his birth certificate. [shrugs] There’s all kinds of idiots in the world, I suppose.]
Also, I didn’t chant any slogan or sign any petition. It’s rather telling that you think people are all easily manipulated puppets. I take it you’re speaking from experience?
So you admit you know nothing about him before this “campaign”, but he’s some kind of evil genius hell bent on stopping legislation that BADLY attempts to stop online piracy, that about sum it up?
Yeah, I think I’m not going to respond to you any more. I know enough conspiracy theorists and hang out with way too many paranoid people as it is. Them I can handle, they keep it reasonable. You. You’re something else. Maybe you and bob should get together and start your own blog. You semi sound like him. Replace “Google” with “big search” and I wouldn’t even be able to tell the difference. [pats you on the head] There there. I promise the big bad Google boogeyman won’t be hiding under your bed while you sleep at night, plotting how to best ruin your day by decimating bills that are just bad to begin with and plotting another global conspiracy to organize the internet and people all over the country to who knows what.
Re: Re: Re:3 Re:
Uh huh… And the twin towers incident was a CIA plot…
Re: Re:
It is evident that there are neighborhoods where many, many people don’t respect all sorts of laws. Why not just flatten the whole neighborhood? What’s the point of playing nice?
Re: Re: Re:
So now leveling a neighborhood equates to disrupting an infringing torrent? It’s no wonder people make fun of you.
Re: Re: Re: Re:
The mindset equates. The example is intentionally exaggerated.
The point, since you seem to have missed it, is that it’s not “playing nice” to avoid harming innocent bystanders.
Re: Re: Re:2 Re:
So in your fantasy world, doing nothing to stop infringing torrents would be more effective to stop infringement than disrupting them?
You know, there are medications that can probably help you. Just make sure you obtain them from a legitimate source as there are lots of impostors selling bogus meds online too.
Re: Re: Re:3 Re:
Doing nothing is better than doing something which doesn’t actually address the problem at all, but simply creates more problems. If they had something effective to do, no one would even be having this conversation.
Re: Re: Re:4 Re:
Are you kidding? Any action taken to address infringement has the piracy apologists fulminating.
Re: Re: Re:5 Re:
Perhaps, but so what? The fury of piracy apologists is of no consequence.
Re: Re: Re:6 Re:
The fury of piracy apologists is of no consequence.
Yes, exactly…..
Re: Re: Re:7 Re:
So let’s piss everyone off, whether they torrent or not! That’ll make people respect copyright! This is genius!
Re: Re: Re:5 Re:
No, far from it.
Any action taken to address infringement that places undue burden on innocents (in the form of accusations and having to pay to be permitted the opportunity to prove their innocence), allows for vast censorship of the internet based merely on accusations of infringement (with no proof required), violates the laws and judiciary process of other countries (like say pressing for extradition of citizens from other countries for things that are PERFECTLY LEGAL in their own country), and so on and so forth WITHOUT ACTUALLY STOPPING, MUCH LESS REASONABLY ADDRESSING INFRINGEMENT, has the people who will be affected by such actions fulminating.
There, FTFY.
And as various studies, not funded by the RIAA/MPAA, have proven the easiest and best action to address infringement is to offer legitimate ways for people to acquire content. The more legitimate avenues for acquiring content legally, the bigger the drops in piracy. This is a fact. It is also a fact that that is true in even the worst countries, where piracy runs rampant. It’s also been shown that taking away legitimate means of acquiring content leads to a rapid increase in levels of piracy. Hmm. So giving the people what they want and charging them for it seems to lead to a win/win for all involved. How fascinating. Sounds like that would be the reasonable action in that case. As opposed to things that don’t work. But hey, what do I know? I’m just a reasonable guy without an axe to grind.
Re: Re: Re:3 You're just an **AA girl, in the **AA world
Perhaps reading the arguments of the other side would be more effective rather than just spouting off drivel? You seem to have totally forgotten the argument which has been set out over and over again in this and similar discussions: namely, that this “disruption” is not likely to be effective for more than a short period of time, and its likely effect will be to merely cause P2P technology to become less vulnerable to such kinds of attacks.
Re: Re: Re:4 You're just an **AA girl, in the **AA world
A. We must do something.
B. This is something.
Therefore (A->B):
C. We must do this!
Re: Re: Re:3 Re:
And where did I say anything like that? You are just making things up here.
What I’m saying is that it’s immoral to harm innocent others. I’m also saying that these methods, while harming innocent others, will not impact infringement at all. And further, I’m saying that there are ways of addressing infringement that not only don’t harm innocent others but are much more effective.
Not to mention that these methods are no different than those used by crackers the world over and should be condemned to the same degree.
“Doing nothing” was not a part of my assertions.
Hmm, since you’re the one hearing things that aren’t being said, I think you need the medications more than I do.
Re: Re: Re:4 Re:
What I’m saying is that it’s immoral to harm innocent others.
Except your so-called morality doesn’t cut in both directions. Do you think it is moral to unlawfully take the creative output of another- to which you have no rights- for your own personal enjoyment or enrichment?
The Teabaggers could use more douchnozzles like you.
Re: Re: Re:5 Re:
Watching a copied movie is like stabbing someone in the eye. Something is either moral or immoral. It’s as simple as that. Gotcha!
Re: Re: Re:5 Re:
Why do you think this? You do understand that I’ve been talking about the impact on people who do not engage in infringement, right?
Wow, there’s a few different things mushed together in this sentence, so bear with me here while I try to answer it as clearly as possible. If fact, I can’t really answer it directly as asked because it’s too loaded, so I’ll try a different tack.
I think it is immoral to take another person’s work and claim it as your own.
I believe that copyright law can be a useful tool to achieve the ends stated — the enrichment of society.
Further, the “rights” they grant are actually privileges — in the same way that driving a car is a privilege — and as such the scope of them is no more or less than we as a society say it is.
I think that copyright law as it exists right now is, itself, immoral. it does too much harm to society and especially to people who don’t infringe. I’m not saying that this means breaking it is therefore a moral act (although it can be, depending on the circumstances), but that when we are confronted with an immoral law, the fact that it’s law loses any meaning as to whether or not obeying it is moral.
As to piracy itself, it depends on what you mean. I think that distributing other people’s work against their wishes is immoral. I think that using other people’s work in transformative ways (sampling, etc.) is completely moral (and culturally valuable) even though it’s arguably illegal.
I see this copyright battle in perhaps a different way than you. You appear to see it as an epic battle of the artists vs the pirates. And perhaps it is, I don’t know. I don’t have a dog in that fight. I don’t think either side has a moral high ground there.
What I do know is that in the course of conducting that epic battle, bullets keep flying by my own head despite me otherwise being uninvolved. This, I think understandably, angers me. And the vast majority of those bullets are coming from the guns of the copyright side.
I don’t care if you guys want to fight it out. I just want everyone to stop breaking my windows.
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Why not? Piracy has been compared to rape and insistedly referred to as such.
I find this battle entertaining and somewhat brilliant. The disrupters are taking a page from the internet playbook. There was an attack on the internet via SOPA, and the internet harnessed itself to win. Another attack is imminent via CISPA and again, the internet will use itself to try and fend off the attack. Here we have bittorrent attacking the gatekeeper’s control so the gatekeepers are using bittorrent to try and defeat the attack. I love it.
I’m actually excited about where this whole situation might take us. The bittorrent disrupters will never win overall but they may cause enough commotion that something new might spring from this battle. Whatever comes after bittorrent is what I’m excited about.
Re: Re:
Hmm, this could drive innovation better than, what was that antiquated method? Oh yeah, patents or something…
Re:
Believe as you like. There are plenty of people who deny the Holocaust and global warming despite the evidence. Who do you think fed those 70+ amendments to antis on the committee: Jimmy Wales? the douche from Reddit? Masnick? I honestly don’t know why there’s this sense of shame over Google’s role in this. They performed admirably and defeated SOPA, and you get to pretend it was actually you.
Re: Re:
Here’s another link for you to read from The Hill. Unlike you, they are pretty well-informed on what is going on in Washington. Since reading doesn’t seem to be your strong suit, I’ll break out the last line for you:
“Congress dropped the legislation after a massive protest led by Google and other Web companies led to a backlash of voter anger over the issue.”
Google was out in front. Yes, there were others but the insurgency didn’t get traction until they took charge. So you got duped, lots of people did.
http://thehill.com/blogs/hillicon-valley/technology/229443-google-asked-to-take-down-12-million-pages-last-month
Re: Re: Re:
EVERYTHING BAD THAT HAS EVER HAPPENED IS GOOGLE’S FAULT, SOMEHOW!! I READ IT ON THE INTERNET SO IT MUST BE TRUE!!1
Forced dissconect
*Speculation*
If the forged uTP data backed contains the address of a legitimate uTP node and if the target uTP peer responds with a FIN, sent to the real node, due to the invalid sequence this would provide a mechanism to force peer disconnects which matches closely the Pirate Pay description. If this is the case it’s very easily defeated by discarding invalid sequences instead of sending FIN. If it were a legitimate connection the a correct packed will eventually arrive and all will be good and if it’s a spoof there is no harm done.
End Speculation.
Gibsons Cyberspace is here
An unregulated virtual platform where everybody fights each other. It’s here. This is going to be interesting.