Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Privacy Education Security Media Movies

MPAA College Toolkit Raises Privacy, Security Concerns 188

Posted by Zonk
from the educating-the-educators dept.
An anonymous reader writes "The Motion Picture Association of America last month sent letters to the presidents of 25 major universities (pdf), urging them to download and install a 'university toolkit' to help identify students who were downloading/sharing movie files. The Washington Post's Security Fix blog reports that any university that installs the software could be placing a virtual wiretap on their networks for the MPAA (and the rest of the world) to listen in on all of the school's traffic. From the story: 'The MPAA also claims that using the tool on a university network presents "no privacy issues — the content of traffic is never examined or displayed.' That statement, however, is misleading. Here's why: The toolkit sets up an Apache Web server on the user's machine. It also automatically configures all of the data and graphs gathered about activity on the local network to be displayed on a Web page, complete with ntop-generated graphics showing not only bandwidth usage generated by each user on the network, but also the Internet address of every Web site each user has visited. Unless a school using the tool has firewalls on the borders of its network designed to block unsolicited Internet traffic — and a great many universities do not — that Web server is going to be visible and accessible by anyone with a Web browser."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

MPAA College Toolkit Raises Privacy, Security Concerns

Comments Filter:
  • by mdmkolbe (944892) on Friday November 23, 2007 @12:08PM (#21454319)
    I don't see the universities listed anywhere in the article. Which ones are they? We need to know so we can write them letters.
    • by nametaken (610866)
      Funny... the question I was asking was, who are these "great many universities" that apparently allow unrestricted access to their networks from the outside. And how many universities don't already see reports of their network traffic that aren't at least this detailed? I don't want to be an apologist for the MPAA, but c'mon now...
  • by purpledinoz (573045) on Friday November 23, 2007 @12:09PM (#21454323)
    This makes no sense. What are they going to accomplish by going after college kids, who really don't have that much disposable income? It seems counter-productive to me. You piss off a bunch of college kids, who can't afford to spend money on movies anyway, and who are going to earn money in the future, and will probably chose not to spend their money on movies, since the MPAA were being dicks. Not to mention the horrible invasion of privacy and security issues.
    • by shark72 (702619) on Friday November 23, 2007 @12:25PM (#21454445)

      "This makes no sense. What are they going to accomplish by going after college kids, who really don't have that much disposable income? It seems counter-productive to me."

      they're trying to scare them into not pirating. The MPAA is scared to death that it will simply be ingrained in our culture (as it has in some other society's cultures) that piracy is perfectly OK.

      We'll see how this plays out. Back in the 80's I pirated lots of software, and I heard stories of other teenagers being caught for it. Now that I'm an adult, I'm no longe a pirate. The prosecution of software pirates in the 1980s didn't push me into a life of hoisting the Jolly Roger; on the contrary, once I got a job and learned more about how the real world works, I prefer to respect the copyright of others.

      I agree with you that many of the college kids who are pirates today will continue to be as they enter adulthood, but that percentage may not be as high as we might think.

      • by king-manic (409855) on Friday November 23, 2007 @12:57PM (#21454687)

        We'll see how this plays out. Back in the 80's I pirated lots of software, and I heard stories of other teenagers being caught for it. Now that I'm an adult, I'm no longe a pirate. The prosecution of software pirates in the 1980s didn't push me into a life of hoisting the Jolly Roger; on the contrary, once I got a job and learned more about how the real world works, I prefer to respect the copyright of others.
        Piracy did wonders for Microsoft and likely photo, Maya, Lightwave, and many other programs. The cost of these programs puts them out of reach of kids, and kids are the ones who will pick up these essential skills fastest. So if you acclimatized children to your software you basically create future customers. A kid may find he loves 3d work and set his life on a course as a Maya guru. Anyone else will think it's insane spending $3,000 on a box and a CD. So it's int he best interest of people to ensure some version of their software is pirated or provide a non business free non-expiring demo but to also ensure businesses are prosecuted for use without paying. This way you get the benefit of more paying users.

        The thing with piracy is once you get enough money (first job) it's less attractive to spend 2h filtering through torrents to download a season 30 min TV show then it is to spend $80 on the box set. So Piracy may set up the appetites the same way it does for software and convenience and economics convert them to customers.
        • by shark72 (702619)

          "Piracy did wonders for Microsoft and likely photo, Maya, Lightwave, and many other programs. The cost of these programs puts them out of reach of kids, and kids are the ones who will pick up these essential skills fastest."

          Which I believe is EXACTLY why the BSA (the software industry's equivalent of the MPAA) hasn't made college kids their primary target. They tend to go after the businesses, which have the money and should know better.

          "The thing with piracy is once you get enough money (first job)

        • by Sparks23 (412116) *
          This is very true, and also why smart companies now release limited versions of their software free or cheaply. To use your example, Maya now has Maya Personal Learning Edition, which is a free download. Does everything Maya does, but puts a small watermark in the corner of renders. For kids looking to toy with 3D software (or people just curious), Maya provided a way for them to do so legally.
      • Unless you were making copies and selling them, you weren't a pirate anyways. No need to make yourself sound worse than you were, unless you just like the notoriety. No argument that you were committing a crime ... it just wasn't piracy.
    • by gstoddart (321705) on Friday November 23, 2007 @12:25PM (#21454447) Homepage

      This makes no sense. What are they going to accomplish by going after college kids, who really don't have that much disposable income? It seems counter-productive to me. You piss off a bunch of college kids, who can't afford to spend money on movies anyway, and who are going to earn money in the future, and will probably chose not to spend their money on movies, since the MPAA were being dicks. Not to mention the horrible invasion of privacy and security issues.

      They're not chasing the money. They're chasing the people who can be made examples of.

      They're not trying to find people who can pay the settlements -- they're looking for people they can establish the legal precedent and scare the crap out of people. In their mind, if they can stop it in the places where it happens most, and instill in people a great fear, then people will dutifully line up and buy tickets. This is all about the low-hanging fruit and those that can't easily defend themselves.

      The MPAA doesn't give a flying fuck about privacy and security, at least not yours -- they care about their products, their revenue stream, and their business model.

      You'll notice that just a few days ago we say a story of how an *AA sponsored bill is working its way through Congress which would require all universities to buy subscriptions for every student to Napster or risk losing federal support. In other words, they want to get paid for every single university student on the rationale that since they're all pirating, then the *AA's should get paid. Of course, they'll eventually want to extend to high schools, and then eventually to the rest of us.

      What they're looking for is laws to reinforce their monopoly, government agencies to police their copyrights, and federally assured revenue streams. They don't give a rats ass about customers or the risk of how they might be perceived. They're incapable/unwilling to look at the bigger picture. I can understand their point to an extent -- they simply cannot fathom how to 'monetize' all of these digital things, and they're fighting back the only way they know how.

      In their collective minds, if you can't afford to pay to see/hear/hum their products, you should simply do without. And, since they haven't been able to stop it, they're perfectly willing to shit in everyones shoes to get it stopped. If they can get government to do the heavy work, all the better for them.

      Cheers
      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by Truekaiser (724672)
        the disturbing part and the best example to date that the united states is now a fascist state(merger of large corporations and the government), is that they want the state and your tax money to pay for the police doing their dirty work.
      • They're not chasing the money. They're chasing the people who can be made examples of.

        They're not trying to find people who can pay the settlements -- they're looking for people they can establish the legal precedent and scare the crap out of people. In their mind, if they can stop it in the places where it happens most, and instill in people a great fear, then people will dutifully line up and buy tickets.

        You were going so well until...

        This is all about the low-hanging fruit and those that can't easily def

    • by Jason Levine (196982) on Friday November 23, 2007 @12:37PM (#21454537)
      You're not thinking like a MPAA/RIAA executive. MPAA/RIAA executives don't think logically with a long-term outlook. They think in terms of control and monetization over the short term. Will Action A have repercussions 5 years from now? Who cares? I (hypothetical RIAA/MPAA executive) will have made enough money to retire by then anyway.

      Illegal downloads take music/movies out of their control. They won't admit this, but this issue is more important to them than the money. They don't care if the film downloaded was one that was otherwise sitting in the vault, available only on a dozen VHS copies left over from a network broadcast ten years ago. It's their property and if they want it to sit in the vault gathering dust, we the public should kiss their feet thanking them for that decision.

      As far as the money is concerned, they think that these actions will make pirating movies less attractive which will drive more people to buy/rent movies and/or watch movies in the theater. No, don't argue back that pirated copies versus legal copies that would have been bought isn't a 1:1 ratio. Stuff like "ratios" sounds ominously like math to these executives. The only math they care about is the rate at which money is flowing into their pockets.

      And speaking of "rate at which money is flowing", they feel entitled to constantly increasing profits year after year. After all, they've given us such quality works as Boy Band #34 and Third Sequel Of Generic Action Movie - Now With More Explosions. Why aren't we, the public, rushing out to the stores and shoving money into their pockets for this stuff? After all, Boy Band #7 did really well and they were basically the same guys as #34. Also, Generic Action Movie did pretty well in the box office. Why shouldn't the third sequel pull in even more money? (After all, the studio executives made sure the director added more explosions since they [the execs] knew that is what the public wanted.) Any appeals to logic about how spending money is tighter, how people have more options (online entertainment, video games, etc), or how quality is declining fall on deaf ears. After all, they got profit in the past and that means they should get bigger profit now. The only explanation has to be those dirty, rotten Internet pirates.

      Of course, all of this isn't meant to excuse downloading something without the copyright owner's permission. I still think that you shouldn't do that. At the same time, however, I don't think that the MPAA/RIAA are living in the real world with some of the actions they have taken (and some of the things they have tried to get done). At best, they've lost whatever moral high ground they would have had. At worst, they've become so criminal that people committing massive copyright infringement actually have a degree of moral high ground over them.

      In addition,
      • by shark72 (702619)

        "You're not thinking like a MPAA/RIAA executive. MPAA/RIAA executives don't think logically with a long-term outlook."

        Oh, no, quite the contrary. While we may not agree with the MPAA's reasoning, they are going after the universities because of the long-term implications. It's the very same reason that car companies and cigarette companies go after the young-adult market: to create customers for life. In this example, the MPAA is distributing this network monitoring tool because their concern is that on

        • by digitrev (989335)
          Ahh, but there's a difference between making a profit and pissing and moaning when your profit isn't as high as you expected.
      • Stuff like "ratios" sounds ominously like math to these executives. The only math they care about is the rate at which money is flowing into their pockets.

        I think I've read just today enough executive-bashing for a lifetime. These people are human beings. They aren't some money making machine who's only concern is their bank account (that's what the corporation is for). They have concerns, pride, reputations, futures, fears, friends and families. They can't all just care about money flowing into their pocke

    • Harvard (Score:4, Funny)

      by gilesjuk (604902) <giles.jones@nospAm.zen.co.uk> on Friday November 23, 2007 @12:37PM (#21454541)
      This is why they don't sue anyone at Harvard, they know in the long run that would create lawyers who dislike them.
    • by arth1 (260657)

      This makes no sense. What are they going to accomplish by going after college kids, who really don't have that much disposable income?

      It makes hasbeens[1] like Gene Simmons happy?

      Seriously, it has one positive effect -- it increases the loathing the public feels for the MAFIAA, and helps hasten to change to different and better creative arts distribution models.

      [1]: In my opinion, artists are entitled to pay, like the rest of us, as long as they create. Once the creating stops, the money should stop too.

  • by Chrisq (894406) on Friday November 23, 2007 @12:10PM (#21454327)
    Any university that installs that has a problem. University networks are constantly "played with" by students, so the IT department has to be on the ball. Any dumb enough to install this probably have had many student hacks already...
  • Xubuntu (Score:4, Informative)

    by pipatron (966506) <pipatron@gmail.com> on Friday November 23, 2007 @12:11PM (#21454337) Homepage
    Nice. For those of you that didn't read TFA, the toolkit is basically Xubuntu, with some tools like Snort preinstalled.
  • Never examined? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by IBBoard (1128019) on Friday November 23, 2007 @12:11PM (#21454343) Homepage
    Hang on, that's an interesting quote:

    ...the content of traffic is never examined or displayed...

    Given that the aim of the toolkit is supposedly to

    ...help identify students who were downloading/sharing movie files...

    then how do they manage it without examining traffic? If the toolkit monitors BitTorrent (and other) ports then that would tell you who is using P2P, but not who is sharing movies. Maybe all that traffic is from students internally torrenting various Linux distros or their garage bands' MP3s.

    Thank goodness I never lived in University halls.
    • Re:Never examined? (Score:4, Insightful)

      by pipatron (966506) <pipatron@gmail.com> on Friday November 23, 2007 @12:13PM (#21454361) Homepage

      then how do they manage it without examining traffic?

      Easy, they do what they do best. Lie.

    • by c (8461)
      > Given that the aim of the toolkit is supposedly to
      > > ...help identify students who were downloading/sharing movie files...
      > then how do they manage it without examining traffic?

      We're talking about the wonderful corporations who brought us fine tech documentaries such as "War Games", "Hackers", "The Net" and "Jurassic Park". I'm sure their expert technical advisors are simply unable to effectively communicate the details to mere normals such as ourselves.

      c.
    • ...the content of traffic is never examined or displayed...

      then how do they manage it without examining traffic?


      The secret is in this function patented by the MPAA:

      private bool isInfringing(IP IPAddress)
      {
      return true;
      }

  • It just amazes me that no other large news organization has a reporter devoted to covering this stuff full time, as Krebs does. Hell, Krebs isn't even part of the paper; he's attached to the Web site. I guess that says it all. Keep up the great work Brian.
    • Naive much? (Score:3, Insightful)

      You wonder why no large media companies (fixed it for you) have a report devoted to this, or even report on it much or do anything but rehash the RIAA/MPAA press statements and never ever examine it.

      Follow the money. You might as well ask, why do popular entertainment shows like Futurama show a dislike for things like napster and filesharing in general? Because they are the ones whose files are being shared!

      Geez, name a news company that isn't part of some huge media giant. You might start to realize that

      • by gruntled (107194)
        Certainly possible. However, as a guy who spent over two decades producing content for media companies (although back in my day we used to call it writing for the newspaper) I never, ever had anybody stop me from writing something. Heck, I rarely had anybody telling me what to cover, since as the designated expert, I was the guy telling my bosses what was important. But do go on...
        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          by king-manic (409855)

          Certainly possible. However, as a guy who spent over two decades producing content for media companies (although back in my day we used to call it writing for the newspaper) I never, ever had anybody stop me from writing something. Heck, I rarely had anybody telling me what to cover, since as the designated expert, I was the guy telling my bosses what was important. But do go on...

          The problem isn't so much blatant censorship int hat fashion it's more like this: Neo-con journalists tend to write Neo-con articles. Neo-Con editors tend to hire Neo-con journalists. Neo-con paper owners tend to hire Neo-Con editors. Thus The guy at the top influences the content being output through editorial/selective means. A story of "Man dies after police taser him" can be spun as "Belligerent suspect dies after struggle with police" or "Unarmed immigrant murdered by police."

          This tyep of spin is true

          • by gruntled (107194)
            I think your analysis certainly identifies a factor, but I would suggest that the larger problem is this: media organizations are run by middle aged (or even old) white guys. They use a computer for email and Google; that's it. Online banking? Are you crazy?

            Media coverage (outside the local level, where it's mired in "if if bleeds it leads") generally fits into the following cubbyholes: National (political) news, local (political) news, sports, and business. "Features" is everything from restaurant reviews
            • I think your analysis certainly identifies a factor, but I would suggest that the larger problem is this: media organizations are run by middle aged (or even old) white guys. They use a computer for email and Google; that's it. Online banking? Are you crazy?

              Media coverage (outside the local level, where it's mired in "if if bleeds it leads") generally fits into the following cubbyholes: National (political) news, local (political) news, sports, and business. "Features" is everything from restaurant reviews to comics. Where exactly does coverage of computer security fit?

              I certainly agree that the "journalist" demographic doesn't frequently overlap the "tech guru" demographic and the lack of overlap likely leads to poor or infrequent reporting on that topic.

  • by jihadist (1088389) on Friday November 23, 2007 @12:14PM (#21454365) Homepage Journal
    They're about to become corporate serfs. Give them a four year break from corporate dominance, so they have that much more psychological trauma when they exit school, which will make them the perfect mentally broken spiritual voids who need to buy our products.

    Thanks,
    The NWO

    • by garcia (6573)
      They're about to become corporate serfs. Give them a four year break from corporate dominance, so they have that much more psychological trauma when they exit school, which will make them the perfect mentally broken spiritual voids who need to buy our products.

      While my mind was "corrupt" regarding corporate control, copyrights and IP infringement long before entering college, the vast majority of those in college learn about it as soon as they step foot into their dorm room and their geek roommate/hallmate/
  • This toolkit in comparison to instead installing a filter system that the MPAA (slashdot lame filter see this as junk characters) would then maintain a database off site from the university ...

    But students would find ways around the filter?

    vs.

    Their toolkit wrongly identifies students as illegal down loaders who actually aren't.

    In other words, how is the toolkit going to verify an illegal download or is it just passing all traffic to the Motion Picture spys?

    Somehow this sounds more Hitleronian tell on you fa
    • by shark72 (702619)

      "Their toolkit wrongly identifies students as illegal down loaders who actually aren't. In other words, how is the toolkit going to verify an illegal download or is it just passing all traffic to the Motion Picture spys? Somehow this sounds more Hitleronian tell on you family, then its supports education. Just because the entertainment industry has found interest in attacking its customers, should the universities follow suit?"

      It's a tool, not a judge. Its intended user is the university IT guy; it shows

  • All this will be is another challenge for people to find work-arounds. Has any of this stuff actually ever worked? Has any attempt to stifle people downloading ever resulted in anything other than increased downloading? How many times has the RIAA for example, declared victory and "great strides"? Funny that a week or so after a record executive says the RIAA going after consumers was a mistake, the MPAA shows up to take up the gauntlet. And again, down the RIAA path of going after college students. We'll
  • by talon_262 (514764) <talon_262@yahoo . c om> on Friday November 23, 2007 @12:18PM (#21454391)
    it's all about control and flexing their legal muscles to intimidate the rest of the public into towing the line. The MPAA is using this to gather more ammo in order to sue the people who are old enough to know what P2P is, who tend to use P2P apps to get music/movies/etc. on a regular basis, and who tend to have limited resources to fight back in court.
  • .... That schools that do not install this "tool" will get the lion's share of RIAA lawsuits?
    • install an anti-MAFIAA toolkit!

      1) Install a firewall that sniffs traffic
      2) See if it's not bittorrent or bittorrent sites
      3) if it is, BLOCK IT
      4) Put the MPAA toolkit in a machine behind the firewall! Ta-da! :D
  • ... the hacker team MPAA for this great social engineering attack.

    Everyone please remember to distribute those IP addresses of the kit downloaders so we can hit these colleges HARD!
  • The MPAA got the same people to write this "tool" as they get to write those super-realistic computer scenes in the movies!
  • by transporter_ii (986545) on Friday November 23, 2007 @12:35PM (#21454527) Homepage
    mpaaBuddy is an on-screen "intelligent software agent" created by the MPAA, and based upon Microsoft Agent technology. The goal of the program is to help users enrich their online movie experience as they discover digital movies together with the included "mpaaBuddy," which is an animated, purple Tom Cruise. Users can interact with Tom by asking him questions, get recommendations on new movies released by MPAA members, as well as be politely informed when unapproved websites are loaded.

    Other features include, an integrated download tracker, movie-related themes, desktops, screen savers, and cute, animated emoticons, bearing a resemblance to top-selling actors. Also included is a desktop search utility that indexes a hard drive's contents in order to allow the user to easily perform searches.

    While initial response to the program has been positive, a few early users complain that the program is buggy. "The program keeps changing my home page to a crappy MPAA home page," said one teenager who wished to remain anonymous out of fear of a MPAA-sponsored lawsuit. There have also been complaints of an increase in pop-up advertising.

    • Users can interact with Tom by asking him questions, get recommendations on new movies released by MPAA members, as well as be politely informed when unapproved websites are loaded.

      One problem is that Tom only recommends his own movies.

      Another is he keeps yakking about how getting Audited will solve all your problems, and get you a Real Doll Katie Holmes Bot of your very own.

  • Will they distribute the source code with it? Will they allow people to freely copy and modify that toolkit? I say, download it, get the tech department to modify it to their liking, and install it! That's what the open source spirit is all about, fixing broken software. I suggest they get fixing that privacy issue first...
    • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

      by happyslayer (750738)

      LOL...I can see it now. The next court case will be Stallman, FSF, EFF, and a million GPL-code authors suing the MAFIAA for copyright violations because they haven't released the source code. And, all the arguments that the MAFIAA have made in court previously will be dropping on them like a ton of AOL cd mailers. BWAH-HA-HA-HA-HA!!!!!

      To the language nazis out there: if the MAFIAA gets hoisted on their own copyright petard, is that irony?

  • by Gossi (731861) on Friday November 23, 2007 @12:51PM (#21454635)
    The software is available to download here: UniversityToolkit.com [universitytoolkit.com] in ISO format. The software 'pings' this server on boot for this file [universitytoolkit.com]. If you want to crack a load of university networks, just crack that server and you're away (it's a flat Redhat Enterprise Server boxen).

    Also, the software developer is breaking the law. They haven't shipped the modified code they've made (eg ntop).

    • Does anyone have a .torrent for the iso?

    • by Epsillon (608775)
      What is ironic here is just which law they're breaking: They're committing copyright infringement (distributing GPL software without source which, in turn, means they have no right or licence to distribute, making that action a breach of copyright) to tackle copyright infringement.

      Of course, it's alright for them to rip off "some damn pinko commie's" code to save themselves from the spectre of "new media," free thinkers and falling revenue, isn't it? After all, given the content they produce is such good
  • Does this tool put a lot of load on the network like what port scan and other Brute force hacking tools do?

    Does it try to suck up network bandwidth?
  • Anyone want to download the kit at universitytoolkit.com and make sure all the source is being distributed as well? If they are not making the source available for their little Linux distribution someone should get the GNU to sic their lawyers on them.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday November 23, 2007 @01:12PM (#21454795)
    As someone pointed out upthread, the kit is simply Xbuntu with a some network tools pre-installed like Snort and ntop. This leads to a few questions:

    1. Since the kit is a derivative of the default Xbuntu install, is the MPAA still allowed to ship the kit with Canonical's trademark (Xbuntu) prominently displayed as boot splash?

    2. Since the MPAA is distributing GPL'd software aren't they obligated to provide source code for the kit upon request?

    3. Is there any MPAA written programs included in the kit? Is it based on GPL software and thus required under the licensing terms to have its source code available upon request?

    4. IIRC, Canonical products ship with some proprietary drivers. Since the MPAA kit is a derivative of Xbuntu, does it have permission to distribute the same drivers, or did Canonical get special permission which the MPAA does not have?

    5. If the MPAA does not supply any source code that the may be legally obligated to do under GPLv2 license, then can individual copyright holders of the multitude of programs included with Xbuntu, give notice that they are revoking the MPAA's right to distribute their software under the provision of Section 4? Section 4 states:

    4. You may not copy, modify, sublicense, or distribute the Program except as expressly provided under this License. Any attempt otherwise to copy, modify, sublicense or distribute the Program is void, and will automatically terminate your rights under this License. However, parties who have received copies, or rights, from you under this License will not have their licenses terminated so long as such parties remain in full compliance.


    Note that Fyodor terminated SCO's right to distribute Nmap in any of their products under that section, which SCO complied with.
  • Even If (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Nom du Keyboard (633989) on Friday November 23, 2007 @01:48PM (#21455051)

    Even if there is a firewall at the perimeter of the school network, all of the students are inside of it!

  • the content of traffic is never examined or displayed

    This looks certain to hit the wrong targets, as is wont for the RIAA. All this would identify (if the truth is being told here) are heavy Internet users. That's even worse than their current method of sending questionable IP addresses and times. College should be teaching how the Internet will be a valuable part of your whole life because you can speak to to the entire World through it, but now it would seem you'll be in danger if you ever use it muc

  • Hidden Content (Score:2, Interesting)

    by KingEomer (795285)
    http://universitytoolkit.com/ [universitytoolkit.com] (mentioned in the pdf) seems to have some hidden content. The page displays a link to: http://universitytoolkit.com/MPAA_University_Toolkit_Admin_Guide.pdf [universitytoolkit.com]. If you look at the source, you can notice a link at the bottom which isn't displayed: MPAA_University_Toolkit_Administrators_Guide.pdf (it's a relative link in the source).

    This version is slightly longer, with what looks like a section detailing development goals. Can anyone see anything incriminating there?
  • Too bad its tied back to the industry, as a free and easy to setup network monitoring tool like that would be nice.
  • How about releasing the movies in a timely manner on a product we want to buy?

    Surfs up hit torrent sites at least a month ago, just about to appear in Danish cinemas, that means at least another 4-5 months before we can buy it on DVD.

    Yeah they want to get as much money from us as they can by forcing us to go to the cinemas, I did just that tonight to watch beowulf - my first trip to a cinema for 3-4 months and I got reminded why I hate it there - the stink of popcorn, the constant yabbering and 25 minuttes

You will lose an important disk file.

Working...