An Inside Look At RIAA DMCA Letter GenerationCampuses discover the process isn't quite what they thought.... 10:25AM Wednesday May 14 2008 by Karltags: legal · FileswappingThe other day, I discussed how ISPs are starting to take a more aggressive role against piracy on their networks, and how many governments were adopting "three strikes" anti-piracy policies. As I mentioned, the existing method of DMCA letter generation relies on largely unaccountable and secretive organizations like BayTSP and Media Sentry. In an interesting read, the Chronicle Of Higher Education offers a chat with an anonymous RIAA employee who recently detailed how Media Sentry works. Of note from the article is this official RIAA reaction: (RIAA spokeswoman Cara Duckworth) acknowledged that the RIAA can tell only when a song is being offered for users to illegally download; investigators have no way of knowing when someone else is actually downloading the song. Of course, the courts believe that making the file available is not copyright infringement, but copying it, or allowing it to be copied, is. A posting to the Educause listserv (via Ars Technica) has more detail: DMCA notices are frequently triggered by the presence in a "shared folder" of a file whose distribution from that shared folder would be unauthorized, rather than by observation of an actual unauthorized transmission of such a file. The reports indicate the DMCA letter generation process is a lot of guess work and the RIAA remains on legal shaky ground. Yet, as I reported last week, Comcast is considering terminating the connections of those who receive four DMCA warnings in one year. I doubt customers really trust the RIAA's enforcement henchmen to determine the fate of their broadband connection. I also doubt ISPs would have much fun playing starring roles in this legal fight.
Related:- More On Media Defender's Latest Screw Up
- Send Your Enemy's Printer A DMCA Warning!
- RIAA Drops Case That Hinges On 'Making Available' Issue
- MediaDefender Makes Both Legal and Illegal Downloads Available
- Law Professors Want New Trial for First RIAA Trial Win
- MPAA: Evidence? Who Needs Evidence?
- RIAA Joins MPAA In Thinking Proof Isn't Necessary
- Europe Drafts Law To Stop Filesharers From Accessing Web
|
 
Cheese
Premium
join:2003-10-26
Naples, FL
clubs: | Hmmm Interesting, very interesting.... | |
|  | jc100
join:2002-04-10 | Re: Hmmm Nope.. not at all. So in order to get around such shaky ground, the RIAA sends someone to download the file and log such activity. There by, they claim the person broke the law and that they now had net losses. Easy fix. | |
| | | hoyleysox
join:2003-11-07
Long Beach, CA | Re: Hmmm If the RIAA did that on Bittorrent, they would be breaking the law by making the infringing file available for others to download also... | |
| | | | jc100
join:2002-04-10 | Re: Hmmm They own title to said file, so it's not illegal to share. The FBI has done that to catch pirates, so I'm sure the RIAA can. | |
| | | | | Yikes2000
join:2001-08-15
Irvine, CA | Re: Hmmm If RIAA shares the file on BitTorrent, then RIAA is in effect granting the downloaders to share the file with others because downloading requires sharing in standard BitTorrent. | |
| | | | | 
tudmax
join:2005-04-08
Kitchener, ON
 ·Bell Sympatico
| said by jc100  :They own title to said file, so it's not illegal to share. The FBI has done that to catch pirates, so I'm sure the RIAA can. Technically RIAA doesn't own the title to anything. People who they represent do. Therefore RIAA is liable just as anyone else if they download said illegal content.
--
Please engage eyeballs and retain functional brain before operating fingers. | |
| | | | | | | Skippy25
join:2000-09-13
Hazelwood, MO | Re: Hmmm Nice try, but if the company they hire to download the files were given authorization to do such (which they would be as that is what they were hired for), then that company is not breaking any law. | |
| | | | 
Maggs
Premium
join:2002-11-29
Woodside, NY
clubs: | Wouldn't that be entrapment | |
| | | | | 
GamerGeek
join:2003-07-26
Fortuna, CA
| Re: Hmmm said by Maggs :Wouldn't that be entrapment That would most definitely be entrapment. | |
| | | | | jc100
join:2002-04-10
 ·RoadRunner Cable
| No. Entrapment is a very tough defense that RARELY if ever works. I mean the police these days pretend to be kids and snare people. The person on the other line is an adult, yet they get them for attempted solicitation of a minor. That is entrapment but they still get those people. That's just one example. The only time I CAN EVER remember the entrapment defense working in a major case would be with Delorean. Delorean was approached by the FBI to sell drugs after his was going bankrupt. T hey then got him on drug charges and he won on the defense they approached him and not vice versa. However, 99.99 percent of the time, you're shit out of luck with that defense. | |
| 
hairspring
join:2007-11-23
Oakville, ON | This practice will become widespread ISPs represent deep pockets with high risk profiles. They will jump at the chance to put due diligence standards in place to appease the RIAA. | |
| | 
R0CKY
TSI Rocky
Premium,VIP
join:2005-05-19
Chatham, ON
| Re: This practice will become widespread said by hairspring :ISPs represent deep pockets with high risk profiles. They will jump at the chance to put due diligence standards in place to appease the RIAA. I'd suspect this point could be argued, at least from where I stand being part of a pure ISP perspective. The ISPs that are to gain here are mostly ISPs who are also content providers or Media Providers. Those who are true-blue ISPs who are there to simply be an Onramp are only going to want to step in and get involved when the law says to do so, otherwise being transparent is healthy for both ISP and client.
This problem really seems to be more about the Telco/Cableco companies who are trying to leverage their ISP presence to serve and gain from their Media/Content presence.
...just guessing of course! 
--
TSI Rocky - TekSavvy Solutions Inc. | |
| | | 
KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK
·Cox HSI
·AT&T Southwest
| Re: This practice will become widespread said by R0CKY :This problem really seems to be more about the Telco/Cableco companies who are trying to leverage their ISP presence to serve and gain from their Media/Content presence. ...just guessing of course! You sir, have guessed... wisely.
--
"Regulatory capitalism is when companies invest in lawyers, lobbyists, and politicians, instead of plant, people, and customer service." - former FCC Chairman William Kennard (A real FCC Chairman, unlike the current Corporate Spokesperson in the job!) | |
| Mr Matt
join:2008-01-29
Eustis, FL
·Comcast
edit:
May 14th, @10:54AM
| You do not have to be a Rocket Scientist to figure it out  If ISP's cannot block P to P traffic they need find another way to reduce network traffic to avoid having to spend money to upgrade their networks. Since much P to P traffic is copyrighted music, preventing piracy is a good excuse to snoop on their customers usage of their broadband connection. A great way to deter P to P traffic. That way the ISP's can avoid having to upgrade their networks. Now how will the ISP's stop TV over IP. | |
| | 
TamaraB
Question The Current Paradigm
Premium
join:2000-11-08
Underway
·Verizon Online DSL
| Re: You do not have to be a Rocket Scientist to figure it out said by Mr Matt : ... Since much P to P traffic is copyrighted music ... Can you back this statement up with some evidence?
Bob
--
Motor Vessel - Tamara B.
43' Long-Range Trawler
Cape Elizebeth ME.
See her Here. | |
| | | 
jap
Premium
join:2003-08-10
038xx
·Verizon Online DSL
| Re: You do not have to be a Rocket Scientist to figure it out said by TamaraB :said by Mr Matt : ... Since much P to P traffic is copyrighted music ... Can you back this statement up with some evidence? Measured in data volume it's way more video than tunage. But don't play dumb, Bob. It's a given that most volume - not merely 'much' - is infringing material. I'll hazard 80% +/- 5%. Asking for "evidence" is a fool's game and beside the point.
Captivating is the tangled problem of relative harm, relative ethics, and schisms between creator(s) and copyright owner(s) ... which in an ideal world would be the same entity. Every infringement is differently speculative in it's actual social impact. Positive & negative. The comedy is watching our bizzistlators attempt to frame things as a flat-world dichotomy; infringers versus 'the rest of us'. | |
| | | |
TamaraB
Question The Current Paradigm
Premium
join:2000-11-08
Underway
·Verizon Online DSL
| Re: You do not have to be a Rocket Scientist to figure it out said by jap : ... Measured in data volume it's way more video than tunage. You mean P2P is. How much of it is copyrighted material being illegally transferred?
said by jap : Asking for "evidence" is a fool's game and beside the point. We've entered a brave new world in our legal system when "evidence" is "beside the point", and a "fool's game". Let's see how that plays out in other parts of society. Eighty percent of Americans smoke pot; therefor you can be arrested for being an American. How does that fit? Take your logic out of the realm of P2P, and it becomes utter nonsense.
I would honestly like to know where you get these figures "80% +/- 5%" from? Does this represent your usage of P2P? A "SWAG"? Or is it merely MPAA/RIAA/ISP propaganda?
Bob
--
Motor Vessel - Tamara B.
43' Long-Range Trawler
Cape Elizebeth ME.
See her Here. | |
| | | | |
jap
Premium
join:2003-08-10
038xx
·Verizon Online DSL
edit:
May 15th, @07:32PM
| Re: You do not have to be a Rocket Scientist to figure it out OK, I made you defensive. Sorry.
The realm is P2P, it's not very measurable, my percentage statement is clearly labeled as a guess. If you p2p even a little you'll know the overwhelming volume is infringed material. Arguing anything else looks rediculous. Often one must go with the experiential obvious and not play the "hard facts" game. Your insistence on the topic looks silly.
My stating these observations has no bearing on my opinions on the state of IP law or the ethics of infringement. You & I may not be far apart on those. IMO, your commonly observed ideology clouds reality and the "evidence" demands are simply a way to argue to an end you prefer. Me thinks it works against your probable goal.
Sincere, and I mean that, apologies for speaking bluntly in a public thread. I more-or-less like your politics and feel your constant railing against The Man is a burden to the collective voice of progressives same as radicals on the bizzomatic political machine side frustrate their more moderate peers.
Still want to smoke a cigar on the TamaraB with you.  Peace out. | |
| | | | | |
TamaraB
Question The Current Paradigm
Premium
join:2000-11-08
Underway
·Verizon Online DSL
| Re: You do not have to be a Rocket Scientist to figure it out said by jap :OK, I made you defensive. Sorry. Not so much defensive. The very concept of having to pay tribute, or to incur legal expenses, based on no evidence rattles my cage. Now, I hardly ever use P2P, I have no real use for it except getting a linux distro now and then. It is a valid Internet protocol.
I have absolutely no qualms about RIAA/MPAA punishing the guilty. However, to do so, they, like all other enforcement agencies, need to punish the provably guilty. It is apparently easy to see who is downloading what MAY be copyright material. A simple subpoena will reveal the address of the alleged infringer, and another subpoena will allow the search of the hard drive. This is due process.
Threatening/demanding tribute money, without due process, is nothing short of extortion by abuse of process.
said by jap :Still want to smoke a cigar on the TamaraB with you. Peace out. Got some goodies, and recently got gifted a bottle of Havana Club; that most likely won't last too long! You are welcome anytime you are in the area.
Bob
--
Motor Vessel - Tamara B.
43' Long-Range Trawler
Cape Elizebeth ME.
See her Here. | |
| | openbox9
join:2004-01-26
Navarre, FL
·Mediacom
| said by Mr Matt :Now how will the ISP's stop TV over IP. Caps.
In case reading 10-Ks isn't your idea of fun, ISPs are spending billions to upgrade their networks. Anyway, this discussion isn't really about ISPs not upgrading their networks, it's about the **AAs' questionable info gathering techniques. | |
| 
jehu
Premium
join:2002-09-13
MA | What legal fight? Can't ISPs terminate your account for any reason? Where's the legal fight? | |
| | 
marigolds
Gainfully employed, finally
Premium,MVM
join:2002-05-13
Saint Louis, MO
| Re: What legal fight? In the case of Comcast, their issue is that their video services are regulated and cannot be terminated for any reason. More importantly, random terminations on the internet end lead to complaints that are heard by cable regulators; which can cause frication when the next franchise renewal comes around. | |
| 
Skeedatl
To Provoke and Annoy
Premium
join:2007-12-26
Laguna Hills, CA | How do they know what the file is? I had assumed the RIAA were the ones doing the downloading.
If they aren't the ones doing the downloading, how do they know what the file actually is? They only know the size and the title of the file. | |
| | SilverSurfer
join:2007-08-19
| Re: How do they know what the file is? said by Skeedatl :If they aren't the ones doing the downloading, how do they know what the file actually is? They only know the size and the title of the file. But there is no proof that RIAA did the downloading, ergo the RIAA isn't guilty. Don't pick on the poor RIAA and convict them with zero evidence. | |
| | | | | | |
KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK
·Cox HSI
·AT&T Southwest
| Re: How do they know what the file is? Right. Let's say I put a file on up on P2P called "Coming in the Air Tonight.mp3"
BayTSP or MediaJoke or whatever flags it... assuming it's Phil Collins track with the same title.
The DMCA sends a takedown notice and a lawsuit settlement extortion.
Then, in a just world, I'd have a ton of money for lawyers, and so would counter-sue and fight them in court, and if Justice was served, I'd win big punitive damages against them and an injunction to shut them down from doing this again to other people. (Yes, I know, dreaming of justice and money... )
You see, because my MP3 was actually a recording of my backyard at dusk with the sun going down and the crickets and critters singing their tunes. 
--
"Regulatory capitalism is when companies invest in lawyers, lobbyists, and politicians, instead of plant, people, and customer service." - former FCC Chairman William Kennard (A real FCC Chairman, unlike the current Corporate Spokesperson in the job!) | |
| | | | SilverSurfer
join:2007-08-19
| said by Skeedatl :They, like you, claim people are guilty with zero evidence. And "they," like you, are convicting the much victimized RIAA without any proof whatsoever. Don't look now but you just stepped into a steaming pile of hypocrisy. | |
| | | | | | | | | | jester121
join:2003-08-09
Lake Zurich, IL
 ·ViaTalk
| Re: How do they know what the file is? Errr.. that's not how P2P works. You can name the file whatever you want, but it's the MD5 hash created from the file that matches up peers. If the RIAA find a particular hash shared then it doesn't matter what the file is named if what's inside is their music.
This is basically the same argument with the .torrent search sites, they aren't hosting any video or audio files; all they have is pointers TO the actual goods.
(note -- just pointing this out for clarity sake, I don't care much one way or another about P2P, so if anyone wants to argue minutiae you can argue alone.) | |
| | | |
TamaraB
Question The Current Paradigm
Premium
join:2000-11-08
Underway
·Verizon Online DSL
| Re: How do they know what the file is? said by jester121 :Errr.. that's not how P2P works. You can name the file whatever you want, but it's the MD5 hash created from the file that matches up peers. So? The only way to verify the MD5 hash is to download the file, and check the MD5 checksum. Meaning? You, the MPAA in this case, must download, and in the process make the file available to others. This activity, nullifies all your claims of copyright infringement. YOU, the copyright holder, have made the file available. Seems like a legal conundrum to me!
Bob
--
Motor Vessel - Tamara B.
43' Long-Range Trawler
Cape Elizebeth ME.
See her Here. | |
| | | | | ross
join:2000-08-16
·Digizip
| Re: How do they know what the file is? said by TamaraB :said by jester121 :Errr.. that's not how P2P works. You can name the file whatever you want, but it's the MD5 hash created from the file that matches up peers. So? The only way to verify the MD5 hash is to download the file, and check the MD5 checksum. Meaning? You, the MPAA in this case, must download, and in the process make the file available to others. This activity, nullifies all your claims of copyright infringement. YOU, the copyright holder, have made the file available. Seems like a legal conundrum to me! Bob I like your thinking, but the RIAA and MPAA strike me as the leechy type; no upload for you... | |
| | | | | |
TamaraB
Question The Current Paradigm
Premium
join:2000-11-08
Underway
·Verizon Online DSL
| Re: How do they know what the file is? said by ross : ... no upload for you... Being an OLD Fart, I have collected and paid for my music many times over. Take the song I referenced above, "Keep on Chooglin". I BOUGHT it on 33RPM records years ago. Then, when the record became badly scratched, I BOUGHT it again on 45RPM records. Then, when it too became scratched, I BOUGHT it yet again on Cassette tape. When the Tape got eaten by the player, I BOUGHT it yet again on CD. I then lost the CD, so I downloaded the album via P2P. Hell! I PAID for it 4 times! All I did in downloading it was to overcome the manufacture defects in their media. Am I a criminal? Or are the Music Moguls rip-off criminals? After PAYING for it 4 times, don't I have a right to have a good copy of the piece?
Bob
--
Motor Vessel - Tamara B.
43' Long-Range Trawler
Cape Elizebeth ME.
See her Here. | |
| | | | | | | ross
join:2000-08-16
·Digizip
| Re: How do they know what the file is? Aside from the fact you appear to be just a little bit careless with your musical possessions, in a reasonable world one would expect a 40 year old song to be free for the asking, if for non-commercial use, whether you paid for it four times, or not. So, fork the 10K fine, and keep on chooglin'... | |
| 
Rick
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-06
Waterbury, CT
clubs:
| Two problems with that defense.. First..the person offering it would have a hard time explaining what OTHER reason they would have had to have had the file there in the first place if it wasn't meant to be downloaded. And second..
if the only crime is having downloaded it..could the person offering it escape that themselves? It's highly likely they obtained it that way themselves.
IMHO..the RIAA has an effective way of prosecuting individuals
if they wanted to. The real problem is the sheer number of people doing it and the fact they have to proceed case by case person by person makes it unworkable. They tried to do that in the hopes of scaring people but now it's almost a joke to receive a letter apparently and a pinup for their wall.
I'm going to stand by my suggestion posted in another thread that because this did not work that their next target MAY be the Isp's themelves and hence, this is why the isp's are now starting to cooperate more.
--
The Coyote captured the RR! Roadrunner Rick is now Comcastic! | |
| |
See 8 replies to this post | |
| 
David
Last man standing
Premium,VIP
join:2002-05-30
Granite City, IL
clubs:
·AT&T Midwest
| THis also doesn't address another issue too. What about the people who use private VPN tunnels with encryption with a VPN provider that doesn't care(europe)? What does the RIAA/MPAA do about that one? or can they? Theory suggests they cannot do anything. So what's to keep them from going outside of USA's stupid laws? They would have to snoop all VPN traffic and De-encrypt it.
Is it really going to start boiling down to darknets? | |
| ja2007123
join:2007-10-06 | To avoid all that mess simply....... stop downloading illegal files. Whats so hard about it?
Money? Hell, you might end up paying more money if you get caught sharing illegal files. | |
| | DMNTD
join:2002-10-19
usa
edit:
May 14th, @04:30PM
| Re: To avoid all that mess simply....... Oh while your on that topic of illegal...stop breathing, your c02 is killing the planet....see it all depends on your angle. | |
| 
smileyjoe
@charter.com
| well actually as far as them just downloading it and then using it that way. That would be entrapment and even in a civil case would be frowned upon by a jury. The question would also arise that beyond the download of their own personnel, has anyone else downloaded it. | |
| wispalord
join:2007-09-20
House Springs, MO | so what if.. so what if only part of the files leaves the pc and not all of it, like torents get little pieces from all over, then technicaly no one pc transmitted the complete file. | |
| | 
a333
A hot cup of integrals please
join:2007-06-12
Corona, NY
·Verizon Online DSL
| Re: so what if.. How has Verizon been reacting to such **AA attention? Also, if I want to stream my library of music over the internet on an Apache server, would that be illegal? (My server doesn't let the files be downloaded, it just opens up a QuickTime applet in the page which streams the file live) | |
| | | | | | |
|
|
·
