Ganging up on Pirates...

[kennyc]

And so don't you feel this kind of behavior by the media corporations in conjunction with the service providers is going to change the industry moreso than the pirates or pirating itself?

[Fbone]

I recently read that 23% of US bandwidth was used for "peer to peer" and about 50% used for streaming video [Netflix, Hulu, Youtube, etc].

I don't know what 23% means in actual numbers but that sounds like a huge number of people file sharing.

http://www.reelseo.com/video-50-bandwidth-consumption/

This site breaks it down further. Still about 50% video but says 10% Bittorrent with 15% "other."

http://www.businessinsider.com/chart...AI_COTD_051711

[spellbanisher]

Originally Posted by Fbone

I recently read that 23% of US bandwidth was used for "peer to peer" and about 50% used for streaming video [Netflix, Hulu, Youtube, etc].

I don't know what 23% means in actual numbers but that sounds like a huge number of people file sharing.

http://www.reelseo.com/video-50-bandwidth-consumption/

This site breaks it down further. Still about 50% video but says 10% Bittorrent with 15% "other."

http://www.businessinsider.com/chart...AI_COTD_051711

That can't be right, because 90% of internet bandwidth is used for porn.

[Elfwreck]

Originally Posted by DianNC

I don't get it. And, at the risk of sounding uninformed, why don't they go after the websites that are providing the material?

Monitoring a private individual's internet usage seems inordinately intrusive to me. Are the sites that are making these downloads available not also complicit in illegal acts???

Because websites often aren't "providing" material; they're providing links to peer-to-peer torrents, which are files on individuals' machines.

One site ran an ad on April 1 seeking a programmer:

[T]he conundrum [torrentsite] faces is determining who owns copyright over what files are described within torrent files that [torrentsite] indexes, and what are the wishes of these copyright holders. Is a file's copyright owned by hippies such as Richard Stallman and similar Free Software gang with these ridiculous beards? Or socialist commies such as these filmmakers posting free films and shows at Vodo, (absurd, I know) and similarly free music at Jamendo, and any other sites hosting such so-called copyleft non-sense? Or such copyright holders, whoever they are, hang on to their copyright as they rightfully should and intend on suing any who infringes on their copyright? Afterall, victories in court or settlements are worth more than customers. These copyright holders are our friends and [torrentsite] seek your expertise in bringing copyright thieves to justice. And profit.

Candidates for a position as Senior Architect and Programmer for Anti-Piracy has the following requirements:

• Semantically determine from names of file listings within close to 7 million .torrents [torrentsite] indexes, the following: copyright holder of such files, and metadata on the copyright status of such files
• [torrentsite] do not host or have access to such files ([torrentsite] can't be a hypocrite and download these files like all the pirates do), so your job it is to determine the above by solely file names
• No master database referencing copyright ownership and status with files shared on P2P networks currently exist, so your job it is to build such a database
• Desired, but not required: to determine names and addresses of pirates participating in the piracy of copyrighted works, for law enforcement purposes (not those owned by copyleft hippies, after having determined copyright status of files). Note that IP addresses does not suffice, even a child can copy out IP addresses of fellow pirates in his BitTorrent client.

How many of a torrent's listings need to be of copyrighted material shared without permission for it to be shut down? Many indie bands and movie-makers count on torrent networks to distribute their creations; that way, they don't have to host the files all themselves. Cost of distribution is spread throughout a web of volunteers.

And, as mentioned, identifying the material needs to be done by filename alone. Is "Harry-Potter-1.pdf" a copy of Rowling's copyrighted material--or someone's essay about character analysis and symbolisms in Rowling's first book? Or is it a work of fan fiction?

Is a file called "100 Great Scifi Stories.zip" full of infringing material, or a collection of creative commons releases? When you've sorted out that it's not all CC releases, what do you do about the orphan books--the ones where the author is deceased, and it's unclear who owns those copyrights now? They may not mind if the books are still being read.

It's not like selling stolen stereo equipment out of the back of a van; it's a lot harder to pin down who's being harmed and how much, and who's liable for facilitating it. (Is a supermarket liable for not locking up its parking lot late at night if drug trades happen there? If they chain down the lot after closing time, will customers be happy to cover the extra expense of the locks and possibly guards?)

If there were simple, easy answers, they'd've been put in place years ago.

[lestatar]

Originally Posted by spellbanisher

That can't be right, because 90% of internet bandwidth is used for porn.

wait! I thought it was 95%. And then 4% for online gambling.

[Iphinome]

Originally Posted by lestatar

wait! I thought it was 95%. And then 4% for online gambling.

Under rule 34 the last 1% is online gambling porn.

[DianNC]

Originally Posted by Elfwreck

These copyright holders are our friends and [torrentsite] seek your expertise in bringing copyright thieves to justice. And profit.

Thanks for the detailed reply. The ad you quoted is actually pretty funny...a sort of 'in your face' to whomever, I suppose.

I should confess I'm only mildly interested in the outcome. It doesn't really affect me...although, as I've mentioned, I'm uneasy about the implied intrusion (if that's what it will amount to).

[Hellmark]

Originally Posted by Fbone

I recently read that 23% of US bandwidth was used for "peer to peer" and about 50% used for streaming video [Netflix, Hulu, Youtube, etc].

I don't know what 23% means in actual numbers but that sounds like a huge number of people file sharing.

Doesn't mean a bunch of people, just a bunch of bandwidth. If you have 10 Joe Regulars who only view web pages and check email, using maybe 5 gigs a month, and a Max Pirate who downloads 100 gigs of torrents, does it mean that you have 90% of the group being for piracy? No, just that much bandwidth. Most pirates use LOTS of bandwidth, way more than the average, so it skews things. And yeah, the people who I know who pirate use roughly 10-15 times the bandwidth that the non pirates I know, so it only surprises me that the nationwide figure isn't higher.

[Hellmark]

Originally Posted by FatDog

I can explain this:

When you boot your cable modem - you are dynamically assigned an IP address. All your internet traffic is tagged with this number. All the records per day are tagged with this address. If the guy who did download Boardwalk Empire cycled power on his modem, then you cycled power on yours - you now have his old IP number. When they searched - they found HIS activity weeks earlier but that you now have this number.

The computer-savvy pirates cycle their power every few days to help obfuscate the tracking of their activity. The smarter pirates use VPN services which encrypt their packets and their ISP only sees activity between their PC and the VPN service so they cannot see what sites you are accessing because the VPN server is really hitting the sites.

The assigning of IP addresses is automatic but logging the re-assigning of IP addresses go into files that only network engineers see and typically toss out after a few days/weeks. It's not part of the normal billing system that ISPs track. They usually can only see who has each IP address at this moment - not what you had a few days or weeks ago.

Oh, I know how it all works. It is a poor system, which is prone to inaccuracy. They should use something more static, like MAC addresses, at least in combo with the IPs. MAC addresses can still be spoofed, but it would trip up far more people. That way, if you have a situation like mine, compare the MAC addies, and see someone else had used the IP. This is still info that the Media Industry's antipiracy squads can get, and this is still info that the ISPs can log. Relying on one number, that is prone to change is highly problematic.

Originally Posted by DianNC

I don't get it. And, at the risk of sounding uninformed, why don't they go after the websites that are providing the material?

Monitoring a private individual's internet usage seems inordinately intrusive to me. Are the sites that are making these downloads available not also complicit in illegal acts???

With how things are now, most sites are in areas that are harder to do anything about legally speaking (very very very few are in the US), and also with the way P2P networks have gone, most technically just point you to who can get you the files. Think of it this way, if this was the drug trade, the sites would be the guy who tells you where to go to score. "Go talk to Johnny at 123 Stockton St, and ask for 'Herbal Suppliments'. Tell him Bobby sent you." Laws are having to be drafted and changed to account for this.

[mr ploppy]

Originally Posted by theducks

So How are these 'net police' monitoring traffic without getting a warrant to monitor a Named individual? (My name is not 'John Doe')

New laws were created after the world trade centre went down to combat terrorism and to keep us all safe. We had a lot of new anti-terror laws in England as well, they use them now to stop people from sending their children to the wrong schools and to catch people letting their dog mess in the streets.

[mr ploppy]

Originally Posted by DianNC

I don't get it. And, at the risk of sounding uninformed, why don't they go after the websites that are providing the material?

Because it is cheaper to get the ISP to monitor everyone's internet traffic and then pass on the cost to end consumers. Just like only people with something to hide buy cutains for their windows, and only people with ugly bodies wear clothes, if you're not doing anything wrong you have nothing to worry about

[Phogg]

Originally Posted by Hellmark

Oh, I know how it all works. It is a poor system, which is prone to inaccuracy. They should use something more static, like MAC addresses, at least in combo with the IPs. MAC addresses can still be spoofed, but it would trip up far more people. That way, if you have a situation like mine, compare the MAC addies, and see someone else had used the IP. This is still info that the Media Industry's antipiracy squads can get, and this is still info that the ISPs can log. Relying on one number, that is prone to change is highly problematic.



With how things are now, most sites are in areas that are harder to do anything about legally speaking (very very very few are in the US), and also with the way P2P networks have gone, most technically just point you to who can get you the files. Think of it this way, if this was the drug trade, the sites would be the guy who tells you where to go to score. "Go talk to Johnny at 123 Stockton St, and ask for 'Herbal Suppliments'. Tell him Bobby sent you." Laws are having to be drafted and changed to account for this.

A simpler analogy, is that the sites are like phonebooks, and like the yellow pages they do not check what is in an advertiser's store. They just host adds.

[DianNC]

Originally Posted by mr ploppy

New laws were created after the world trade centre went down to combat terrorism and to keep us all safe. We had a lot of new anti-terror laws in England as well, they use them now to stop people from sending their children to the wrong schools and to catch people letting their dog mess in the streets.

Yes. I just read the annual wiretapping report (government figures) to find there was a substantial increase in 2010 (over 2009 and a real spike since 2007).

Out of the thousands of requests for authorization, only one was denied. Most of the applications were for drug-related offenses (not terrorism), yet only a small percentage were incriminating. They're expensive, too. The average cost of a wiretap is around $50K...down only slightly from 2009.

Big brother is listening.

[linux_author]

Originally Posted by DianNC

Big brother is listening.

and one can contribute to 'enhance' the listening:


use emacs 'spook' mode!

[CommonReader]

I don't see how this is going to work for books. Books can be sent as html, doc, rtf, pdf, - the standard files used by the net itself and the basis of business communication. Even deep packet inspection won't help here.