Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Torrent users beware

12346

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 1,462 ✭✭✭Peanut


    Then expect to see hardware level DRM fail due to low take up, ineffectiveness and standards conflicts.


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,031 ✭✭✭lomb


    rsynnott wrote:
    Don't bet on it. The first wave of DRM systems (CSS, various MacroVision things, CD protection) were very naive. They'll get better and better; after all, the industry has plenty of money to throw around. Expect to see hardware-level DRM.

    none of it will work simply because, the pc is an open source system pretty much, this is its beauty, and any amount of drm can be overcome by the open source nature of the pc.
    however with something like a mac, yes it can be controlled, but the pc will never be controlled.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 16,659 ✭✭✭✭dahamsta


    rsynnott wrote:
    Don't bet on it. The first wave of DRM systems (CSS, various MacroVision things, CD protection) were very naive. They'll get better and better; after all, the industry has plenty of money to throw around.
    They've been trying to do that for a decade.
    Expect to see hardware-level DRM.
    They've been trying to do that for a decade.


  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 8,679 Mod ✭✭✭✭Rew


    Good disscussion on DRM:

    http://www.craphound.com/msftdrm.txt

    Its long but very good.


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,573 ✭✭✭Infini


    No matter what kind of DRM they introduce someone will crack in within weeks and post it on the internet. DRM doesn't work and probably never will.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 3,608 ✭✭✭breadmonkey


    now *please* don't flame me to death for this, but what is DRM?


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 16,659 ✭✭✭✭dahamsta




  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 16,659 ✭✭✭✭dahamsta


    Infini wrote:
    No matter what kind of DRM they introduce someone will crack in within weeks and post it on the internet. DRM doesn't work and probably never will.
    Par example, from just this week.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,248 ✭✭✭Duffman


    Gryzor wrote:
    from link above ....

    According to several IFPI's local operations, including Finnish ÄKT, the lawsuits were targeted to P2P users who were considered as "heavy file uploaders", people who share thousands, maybe tens of thousands of files via P2P networks. It should be remembered that downloading from P2P networks is perfectly legal in most of the European countries.

    this can't include copywrited material :confused: Is it legal in our fair land??


    It appears that the copyright acts don't cover downloading something for private use. This means that downloading a song protected by copyright for example is not a criminal offence in Ireland. This is why the IMRO actions will be civil and will probably be settled out of court. Abuse of copyright is actionable under private/civil law though. There's also no money for them in trying to secure criminal convictions and this is, after all, all about getting money.

    The act does provide for offences relating to the possession of articles used to circumvent protection however. So that would probably cover software such as DeCSS for DVD ripping and anything that strips DRM from music files. Importantly the law states that you must knowingly possess these articles specifically for the puporse of circumventing protections.

    This could potentially allow you to construct some strong defences. Pleading ignorance might work.

    Encrypting a partition with software such as TrueCrypt should also make sure that any data you have will be fairly useless as evidence against you.

    The idea behind such software is that encrypted data appears to be completely random. It can't be proved beyond a reasonable doubt that such data is actually an encypted container. This is the standard of proof required for a criminal conviction.

    The burden of proof is much lower in civil actions however, so if you were sued by IMRO this might not be much good to you. (The TrueCrypt docs also suggest something sneaky - Hiding an encrypted container within another encrypted container. So you can appear to be cooperating with any investigation by handing over the password to the first container full of harmless files while nobody even suspects that there might be more data there :) )


  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 8,679 Mod ✭✭✭✭Rew


    The court could order you to provide the decryption key given enough evidence that you may have dodgy stuff. I know sombody who had a system set up to delete dodgy stuff if he didn't preform a certain actin before a certain time. If you are deleating stuff make sure you do it properly!


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 4,003 ✭✭✭rsynnott


    dahamsta wrote:
    They've been trying to do that for a decade.

    They've been trying to do that for a decade.

    And to some measure they've succeeded. The movie companies have managed to block digital video links from most consumer video equipment, for instance.


  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 8,679 Mod ✭✭✭✭Rew


    rsynnott wrote:
    And to some measure they've succeeded. The movie companies have managed to block digital video links from most consumer video equipment, for instance.
    WHat do you mean?


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,282 ✭✭✭BlackWizard


    I dont know if this will make people feel better.
    But i was told that they are stopping "uploaders".
    Basically there is a company checking ISPs to see if there is anyone that has been uploading more than the average person. They then need a type of search warrent to get more details from the ISP and yet again another search warrent to confiscate your harddrive. I got the impression from what i was told that this company is working in conjunction with the Gardai.

    I think someone mentioned this already but if you have your OS on one harddrive and downloads on the other, then all u need to do is too take out your second harddrive and hide it down your pants :)

    Also if your worried about them asking wat do u use sharaza etc, just say downloading freeware :D or say nothing.

    This is basically what a relative told me. hope it makes you feel better ;)


  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 8,679 Mod ✭✭✭✭Rew


    Yeah it would be a good idea to get rid of the physical evidence. Then install a wireless access point with no encryption and let them prove it wasn't sombody else logging in wirelessly...


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,949 ✭✭✭SouperComputer


    Rew wrote:
    Yeah it would be a good idea to get rid of the physical evidence. Then install a wireless access point with no encryption and let them prove it wasn't sombody else logging in wirelessly...


    that with a windows 98 machine, no updates, no AV, no firewall, a few trojans, a sprinkle of spyware and the entire contents of C:\ shared with full RW access should do the trick

    of course, the machine in question would have a 98 COA! Anything else would be STEALING! :D


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,248 ✭✭✭Duffman


    I dont know if this will make people feel better.
    But i was told that they are stopping "uploaders".
    Basically there is a company checking ISPs to see if there is anyone that has been uploading more than the average person. They then need a type of search warrent to get more details from the ISP and yet again another search warrent to confiscate your harddrive. I got the impression from what i was told that this company is working in conjunction with the Gardai.

    I ;)



    They need to have evidence that you were actually uploading specific copyrighted material before they'll look for an injunction to seize your hard drives. These injunctions are difficult to obtain and If they just had evidence you were uploading more than the average user the court wouldn't grant one.

    Also, if they did obtain the injunction and subsequently found nothing on your drives you could fight back with a counter-claim for damages not to mention the legal costs they'd be faced with.


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,949 ✭✭✭SouperComputer


    heres a hypothetical situation:

    your ISP is in your personal name, so they come after you. But "you" dont have any files.

    The server on which your files (linux ISO's etc) are stored on is property of a company in the same building. You may be the owner of that company.

    Would they have to get a separate warrant for the companies equipment?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 17,208 ✭✭✭✭aidan_walsh


    You wouldn't have a problem with Linus ISOs (unless you're using it in the nudge, nudge, wink, wink type of way). Other than that, IANL but it may depend on whether you are operating as a sole trader.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 16,659 ✭✭✭✭dahamsta


    Depends on the scope of the warrant. If the gardaí suspected this as a possibility they might widen the scope of the warrant, but there's a chance the judge would be less likely to sig it then. I don't understand why the Linux ISOs would be an issue, even SuSE/Novell allows people to download them these days. The only ISOs that could possibly cause hassle would be something like RHEL, and I can't see Red Hat kicking up much of a fuss about it. The primary focus for the gardaí would be music files that infringe, since the raids would be sponsored by IRMA. (I'm being cynical.)

    adam


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,338 ✭✭✭aphex™


    Would they have to get a separate warrant for the companies equipment?
    Companies don't have the right to own property. Technically, only people do. It's in the constitution. They get a warrant for property controlled by the directors.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 3,489 ✭✭✭Pa ElGrande


    12th April 2005 - Irish Recording Industry Takes Legal Action Against Major Music Filesharers

    The Irish Recorded Music Association, IRMA, today announced the start of legal action against "serial filesharers" in Ireland who illegally make copyrighted music available on the Internet. IRMA is seeking damages and injunctions against 17 individuals who have illegally uploaded hundreds or thousands of music tracks onto peer-to-peer filesharing networks.

    As a first step, IRMA is asking Internet Service Providers to release the names of the individuals they have found to be abusing copyright on the Internet. The major filesharers subject to legal action include users of the filesharing network FastTrack - on which KaZaA runs - and the Gnutella network.

    IRMA Director General, Dick Doyle, said: "This action is being taken against serial file sharers. The top six offenders have uploaded in excess of 2,000 illegal files which is equivalent to 200 albums. This is wholesale mass distribution and is effectively stealing the livelihood of the creators of music. When you consider that each of these individuals could be connected to up to 2 million others at any one time, you begin to appreciate the scale of the damage. We have been issuing warnings for 15 months now. It is time to take action - we are not accepting this situation anymore."

    Massive illegal file-sharing is undermining the livelihoods of everyone in the creative chain involved in making music, from composers and music publishers to performers, musicians and record companies. Abuse of copyright on the Internet has contributed to a €28 million drop in music sales in Ireland between 2001 and 2004, a decline of 19%.

    The current legal action comes after 15 months of educational initiatives to raise awareness of the cultural and economic damage done by illegal file-sharing. These initiatives have included educational brochures sent to colleges and businesses, an extensive radio campaign on national and local radio, countless media interviews and an informative website www.pro-music.org. Instant messages have also been sent to the computers of illegal filesharers worldwide warning them of the consequences if they continue breaking the law.

    On behalf of the composers and publishers of music, Victor Finn, Managing Director of MCPS (Ireland) said: "We fully endorse the actions taken by IRMA today. All parties have been fully aware of their responsibilities for some time in this area. Unfortunately, not all have heeded the warnings given and they have made this action inevitable."

    IRMA's announcement comes after a breakthrough year for legitimate online music services that are offering legal downloads to consumers. The current legal action is aimed at giving crucial breathing space to legal services and allowing them room to develop. There are five major legitimate services in Ireland: iTunes, Eircom Music Club, mycoke.com, vitaminic.com music club and wippit.co.uk.

    The launch of legal actions in Ireland forms part of an announcement from the international recording industry that it is stepping up litigation against illegal filesharers internationally. IFPI, the organisation representing the recording industry worldwide, has today announced a total of 963 new actions launched in 11 countries in Europe and Asia. This brings the total number of cases against illegal filesharers to 11,552 worldwide. In Europe, 248 individuals, mostly men aged 25-35, have already paid average fines of €3,000.

    The latest research suggests that the international legal campaign is already having an impact. Overall, the number of infringing music files on the internet dropped from its peak of 1.1 billion in April 2003 to 870 million in January 2005, a drop of 21% despite a sharp rise in broadband penetration worldwide. KaZaa, which used to be the largest and most popular filesharing services, has seen its number of users drop by around 45% since the start of the warning and litigation campaign.

    Éanna Casey, Chief Executive of Recorded Artists and Performers (R.A.A.P), said: "R.A.A.P fully endorses the actions outlined this morning by IRMA. Online music piracy is selfish, illegal and has a direct impact on the economic welfare of Recording Artists and Performers. No industry can be expected to allow illegal activities to continue unchallenged, the unauthorised uploading of copyrighted music is now being confronted and R.A.A.P. is committed to protecting its members' moral and economic rights."

    Source: IRMA

    Net Zero means we are paying for the destruction of our economy and society in pursuit of an unachievable and pointless policy.



  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,340 ✭✭✭Nephew


    after reading this topic i installed peerguardian2 and keep it running when i'm using bittorrent, what exactly does it do in laymans terms?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 16,396 ✭✭✭✭kaimera


    is it me or is 2000 files uploaded a bit 'tame'?

    surely if they were 'serial filesharers' the amount would be oodles more.


  • Registered Users Posts: 8,503 ✭✭✭Makaveli


    This is wholesale mass distribution and is effectively stealing the livelihood of the creators of music. When you consider that each of these individuals could be connected to up to 2 million others at any one time, you begin to appreciate the scale of the damage.

    That's some mega bandwidth they have to be connecting to 2 million others at one time.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 16,659 ✭✭✭✭dahamsta


    Massive illegal file-sharing is undermining the livelihoods of everyone in the creative chain involved in making music, from composers and music publishers to performers, musicians and record companies. Abuse of copyright on the Internet has contributed to a €28 million drop in music sales in Ireland between 2001 and 2004, a decline of 19%.
    Looks like it's Ireland's turn to disperse the FUD generated by the liars the recording industry seems to breed like rats.

    (I'm not saying that sharing copyrighted files isn't wrong. I'm saying that I'll eat my hat if those figures aren't bullsh1t.)

    adam


  • Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,780 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    Companies don't have the right to own property. Technically, only people do.
    Technically, companies are people. Companies can and do own property.
    It's in the constitution.
    Where?


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,997 ✭✭✭The_Bullman


    would those figures quoted, for the decline in the Irish music industry, factor in people buying of the internet from companies outside Ireland.

    Cdwow, play, amazon, etc?


  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 8,679 Mod ✭✭✭✭Rew


    kaimera wrote:
    is it me or is 2000 files uploaded a bit 'tame'?

    surely if they were 'serial filesharers' the amount would be oodles more.

    It is tame, but the more techie savy amoung us arn't stupid enough to get caught... ;)


  • Registered Users Posts: 8,503 ✭✭✭Makaveli


    would those figures quoted, for the decline in the Irish music industry, factor in people buying of the internet from companies outside Ireland.

    Cdwow, play, amazon, etc?

    More than likely. People have started to realise that cds can be bought for less than €22 a pop. Maybe they wouldn't be reporting such substantial losses if they didn't allow HMV et al to charge so much for a cd.

    Also, didn't IRMA sue CDWow last year too?


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 4,573 ✭✭✭Infini


    Yeah. I heard they forced them to stop selling temporarily but CDWOW just got round it.


Advertisement