Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Piracy United Kingdom Your Rights Online

Warner Brothers Hiring Undercover Anti-Pirates 443

Posted by samzenpus
from the WB-privateers dept.
An anonymous reader writes "TorrentFreak reports that Warner Brothers UK is hiring college students with an IT background to participate in an internship that will pit them against pirates on the Web in an effort to crack down on illegal digital distribution. The intern will literally be on the front-lines of the epic battle against pirated content, ensnaring users in incriminating transactions, issuing takedown requests, and causing general frustration amongst the file-sharing population on the Internet."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Warner Brothers Hiring Undercover Anti-Pirates

Comments Filter:
  • by bit9 (1702770) on Monday March 29, 2010 @07:34PM (#31663990)
    Where are all the anti-anti-pirates?
    • Re: (Score:2, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward

      right ahead of the anti-anti-anti-pirates.

    • by sopssa (1498795) * <sopssa@email.com> on Monday March 29, 2010 @07:42PM (#31664094) Journal

      It's not a competition. What they should do is offer Spotify [wikipedia.org] like service for movies all around the world, not just in US, and either ad-supported version or $10-$19 per month paid subscription with perks like PS3 and mobile streaming and so on. After Spotify came around 1.5 years ago people haven't had a need to pirate MP3's anymore. It's actually nicer to use than P2P - that's something that movie industry needs to have to combat piracy (hopefully Voddler [wikipedia.org] will get there). When the service works good and is reasonably priced, you win a lot of customers.

      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by h4rr4r (612664)

        Spotify is not available in most of the world. Only 6 countries and no linux client. I would rather just buy non-drmed music.

        • by sopssa (1498795) *

          It's a good example of a well done solution to combat piracy, and which is actually more convenient and better than P2P. I'm sure they will try to expand, they've had plans for US for a long time now. Also, their client works perfectly under Wine. With subscription you can also use Despotify [wikipedia.org] and other third party clients (theres some made for Windows Mobile at least)

      • by h4rr4r (612664)

        Voddler also infringes on the copyrights of the XBMC developers, not a good sign for a company that wants to make money from copyrights.

        • by sopssa (1498795) *

          They were going to provide all the front-end source code, but it looks like they've moved Flash based streaming now. Which is a good thing, that older client was pain in the ass to use on any other kind of computer than a media center.

          • by h4rr4r (612664) on Monday March 29, 2010 @07:59PM (#31664306)

            They were going too is no excuse, they still have not.
            They still violated the copyrights of the XBMC developers and then expect to make money from copyrights. They are hypocrites who believe in copyright when it is good for them and not when it does not suit them. These are not the sort of folks people should give money to.

            • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

              by tepples (727027)

              They are hypocrites who believe in copyright when it is good for them and not when it does not suit them.

              But are they much worse than the major motion picture studios, which moved to Hollywood just to be out of range of Thomas Edison's patent goons?

              • by h4rr4r (612664) on Monday March 29, 2010 @08:07PM (#31664392)

                Nope just the same. Mind you most folks don't know about that either, and the people who moved the studios are long dead.

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by purpledinoz (573045)
        You see, the problem was, the music corps had an oligopoly on distribution, and profits were very easy. They essentially became big fat and lazy. Now that the Internet has crushed their oligopoly, the easy money disappeared, and like any fat lazy person would do if the free food was taken away, they're whining and complaining (through the courts), rather than competing. Of course they don't want to work hard and provide customers more value.
    • by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 29, 2010 @07:59PM (#31664302)

      those would be the interns that end up posting information from these companies on wikileaks showing that they are doing illegal things... ah to the companies that think us geeks care about company loyalty... yeah you pay their cheques... and yeah, we can get cheques elsewhere

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by westlake (615356)

        yeah you pay their cheques... and yeah, we can get cheques elsewhere

        tell me why your new employer should trust you after you betrayed your old employer.

        tell me why he keeps you around after he's pumped you dry of anything useful you could tell him.

        tell me how you stop the word spreading around that you are high maintaince, high risk.

        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          by xilmaril (573709)

          yeah you pay their cheques... and yeah, we can get cheques elsewhere

          tell me why your new employer should trust you after you betrayed your old employer.

          Because they have no idea. wikileaks and the like are anonymous, and if that's not enough protection for you, you won't post it there.

          tell me why he keeps you around after he's pumped you dry of anything useful you could tell him.

          If you got hired based on your insider knowledge of a few secrets, as opposed to insider knowledge of techniques and development practices, you're absolutely right.

          tell me how you stop the word spreading around that you are high maintaince, high risk.

          By never starting it, obviously.

        • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

          by rtb61 (674572)

          Employers, employees, nah, this is about uni students paid to dob in other uni students. Those naughty students who use the tech skills to minimise the content expired whilst racking up tens of thousands of dollars in long term eduction debt. So future fellow staff members, seriously, would anyone trust a part time pigopolist narc that ran around pretending to be other's students friend and entrap them into sharing content so they can pick up a prosecution commission.

          This is not so much about peer to pee

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by mmelson (441923)

      Where are all the anti-anti-pirates?

      On 4chan. May as well give them something productive to do.

  • A fools errand (Score:5, Insightful)

    by downix (84795) on Monday March 29, 2010 @07:34PM (#31663994) Homepage

    Rather than exploit the free publicity and growth of revenue, they fight against the rising tides with their swords. If the movie and music industries collapse, it will not be due to piracy, but anti-piracy.

    • Re:A fools errand (Score:4, Insightful)

      by suomynonAyletamitlU (1618513) on Monday March 29, 2010 @09:48PM (#31665350)

      Let's all stop for a moment to remember that we are talking about the entertainment industry. Let that sink in. Entertainment: something affording pleasure, diversion, or amusement, esp. a performance of some kind. (ref [reference.com])

      All of these people--RIAA, MPAA, and their equivalents across the world--are fighting tooth and nail because some people do not consider entertainment to be worth the sometimes exorbitant fees required to access it, and because some people get their entertainment and chafe at being told they have to jump through hoops to enjoy it.

      There are still people starving in this world. There are people fighting for their lives and their beliefs. There are human rights violations. And there is so much else.

      And these people are fighting for the right to overcharge and micromanage your entertainment.

  • by WrongSizeGlass (838941) on Monday March 29, 2010 @07:35PM (#31664012)
    ... on the swashbuckling seas of downloads.

    I'd say "let the best pirate win", but I'm afraid it's going to be anti-climactic. The real pirates will swab the decks with these amateur wanna-be's.
    • Re: (Score:2, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward

      It may be anti-climactic, but how about anti-climatic? Are anti-pirates good or bad for global warming?

      • It may be anti-climactic, but how about anti-climatic? Are anti-pirates good or bad for global warming?

        My Magic 8-Ball says "The Pirates Will Weather The Storm". D'oh!

  • Keep going (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 29, 2010 @07:38PM (#31664044)

    I want some serious action to encourage the development of the completely anonymous protocols.

    Keep pushing, studios.

    • Re:Keep going (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Tassach (137772) on Monday March 29, 2010 @08:26PM (#31664612)

      That's why I'm not worried about this.

      The only people who are going to take a job like this are untalented drones of marginal technical ability who can't get a job elsewhere, especially at the . Furthermore, peer pressure is going to be enough to discourage most people (talented or not) from getting paid to turn narc / sell out to the man.

      The smart, creative people are going to be on the other side of the fight.

      Anyone with half a brain can tell that the copyright cartels are fighting a losing battle, desperately clinging to a business model that has been rendered obsolete by modern technology. P2P would largely disappear overnight if there was a legal alternative that offered a perceived benefit (guaranteed quality, good search, high speed download, brand loyalty, etc) over a pirate source. The studios are unwilling to do that because then they would have to charge prices that are dictated by the market, rather than by monopolistic fiat.

      There will always be some people who will take free over speed or convenience, but there are plenty who won't -- just witness Starbuck's ability to sell a quarter's worth of coffee at a 1000+% markup.

  • Sweet deal (Score:4, Funny)

    by Brian Boitano (514508) on Monday March 29, 2010 @07:38PM (#31664046) Journal

    During the 12 month internship the students will have to maintain accounts at private BitTorrent sites, develop link-scanning bots, make trap purchases and perform various other anti-piracy tasks.

    Sounds like a sweet deal! I'll just copy that to my USB hard drive...

  • Have you ever used BitTorrent? [X] -- Congratulations you are hired!
  • WB UK doesn't want to get their hands soiled, so they get a bunch of job-hungry college kids to do their dirty work. I guess it wouldn't look seemly for a real -AA employee to "maintain accounts at private BitTorrent sites, develop link-scanning bots, [and] make trap purchases."
    • by Kitkoan (1719118)

      WB UK doesn't want to get their hands soiled, so they get a bunch of job-hungry college kids to do their dirty work. I guess it wouldn't look seemly for a real -AA employee to "maintain accounts at private BitTorrent sites, develop link-scanning bots, [and] make trap purchases."

      It also depends on how they are hired. If the papers they sign state that they are responsible for their own actions, it would get WB out of any counter-lawsuits for thing done. Like if a incorrect takedown notice was issued or if they write a bot to scan and it either causes Internet shortages on a site or even worse, then WB just walks away showing those signed papers and the college kid is D.O.A. Not to mention with papers signed like that hiring people who might not know the legal issues of finding and

      • > If the papers they sign state that they are responsible for their own
        > actions, it would get WB out of any counter-lawsuits for thing done.

        It isn't that easy. If WB directs their actions they are agents of WB and it might be held liable regardless of what papers were signed.

        • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

          by Nadaka (224565)

          Additionally they are essentially working as unlicensed private investigators. This is illegal in many jurisdictions and any evidence they may gather is likely to be inadmissible. The RIAA has already been sanctioned for exactly this.

      • by GumphMaster (772693) on Monday March 29, 2010 @08:48PM (#31664850)

        If the papers they sign state that they are responsible for their own actions, it would get WB out of any counter-lawsuits for thing done.

        Curiously, this would leave the WB "employee" liable for any sharing of WB material that they participate in while attempting to entrap others. Let me think, how could that be useful to WB... I see, wait six months after you hire your tranche of stooges, fire and then sue them using the evidence they supplied (thinking this was about others). Win the cases and then point to the stack of precedent you have amassed when you go after future cases. Sweet ;)

  • by Aurisor (932566) on Monday March 29, 2010 @07:42PM (#31664086) Homepage

    Better hope /b doesn't get a list of those interns. It would be really awful if someone were to leak a list of the chosen interns, post it to 4chan, and then have them torture and harass them until they curl up in the fetal position, crying.

  • So? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Locke2005 (849178) on Monday March 29, 2010 @07:42PM (#31664092)
    Why is this an issue? Warner Brothers does have a legal right to enforce their copyrights. While I would prefer they focus on those that are profiting from unauthorized distribution of copyrighted material, they also have a right to issue take-down notices. What would be unethical would be: uploading copyrighted material and then suing anybody who downloads it. Clearly, if WB themselves are freely distributing it, then they are implicitly granting permission for it to be distributed freely.
    • Re:So? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by selven (1556643) on Monday March 29, 2010 @07:51PM (#31664198)

      When we argue, we don't argue about what the law is. That's for the courts to decide. We argue about what the law should be. And, as the discussion here shows, it is not at all clear that Warner Bros is morally right in legally enforcing their copyrights against individual file sharers.

    • by h4rr4r (612664)

      Is that not what they are doing when they have their agents join a torrent swarm?

      • by Locke2005 (849178)
        If they are seeding, yes. How can I be sued for downloading material that an agent of the copyright holder has made available? Redistributing it should also be legal, but that is more of a gray area.
    • Re:So? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by timmarhy (659436) on Monday March 29, 2010 @07:59PM (#31664300)
      no they don't, the government has the right to enforce copyrights. Warner Brothers has the right to ALLEGE an infringement and make a complaint. anything more grants them the roles of judge, jury and executioner all in one.

      If you want to argue ethics, lets debate about movie producers and actors with net worths in the 100's of millions sueing single mothers and college kids for downloading a few movies they otherwise wouldn't pay to see anyway.

      • by Locke2005 (849178)
        I agree with you. Downloading should be perfectly ok. The RIAA other other assholes' actions are based on a tenuous legal argument that everybody that downloads material is also making that material available to others, thus implicitly redistributing copyrighted material. They should have to prove ACTUAL redistribution before requesting damages. Unfortunately, software like bittorrent blurs the line between downloading and uploading. It also brings up another interesting question: if I've only redistributed
        • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

          by timmarhy (659436)
          good point. they should have to prove you seeded 100% of the file before your guilty of infringement.
  • by kawabago (551139) on Monday March 29, 2010 @07:43PM (#31664100)
    The entertainment industry keeps pouring money into anti-piracy and they keep getting further behind. The millions of dollars the industry spends on these campaigns bring in absolutely zero in increased revenue. If the industry took the position that file traders don't matter and that people who buy movies and music are the ones that do matter, they could then spend this money reaching out to people who will buy and bring in increased profits. Continuing to invest in the people who aren't interested in buying is only going to increase costs and drive paying customers away.
  • by dgatwood (11270) on Monday March 29, 2010 @07:44PM (#31664108) Journal

    Well, it might work in the short term. All content protection, whether through DRM, laws, takedown notices, or any other mechanism is fundamentally founded on the principal that "we're smarter than you are", which in the long term is always an untenable position merely because of the scale involved. For every one person they employ to defend their copyright, there are a thousand people looking for ways to break whatever measures they put in place.

    For example, it is possible to design a P2P system that does not rely on trackers (e.g. the DHT scheme that TPB uses). With such a system, content is not hosted anywhere that can get a takedown notice. Combined with onion routing (crypto), you can also make it highly infeasible to determine who is actually seeding the content, nearly guaranteeing that anyone you attack is an innocent victim, thus making the courts take progressively more negative attitudes towards your attacks. Put simply, the harder they try to clamp down on P2P, the greater the security measures that will be put in place to thwart it.

    You cannot compete with P2P by attacking it. You can only compete with it by providing a better experience (or at least a comparable experience) through legal channels for a price that the market is willing to bear. Start by reducing the price of Blu-Ray movies to the same price as their DVD counterparts. That alone will take a huge chunk out of P2P.

    • by russ1337 (938915) on Monday March 29, 2010 @08:28PM (#31664636)

      quote]You cannot compete with P2P by attacking it. You can only compete with it by providing a better experience (or at least a comparable experience) through legal channels for a price that the market is willing to bear. Start by reducing the price of Blu-Ray movies to the same price as their DVD counterparts. That alone will take a huge chunk out of P2P.

      Start by offering 700MB XVID downloads for about USD$5 from fast servers with fantastic bandwidth.

      In the movie file, show one add for an upcoming movie, then show the credit card details and user account information for about 5 seconds. "this copy of $movie is licenced to $name $address $credit_card_number" . The customer will protect your movies with the same level of care as their card information, and will share it at their own risk or have to go to the hassle of editing the information out before putting it on p2p.

      As parent said, only by competing with the product (p2p) will the movie companies win. And they have a chance to make some big money off that 'long tail'. Apply suitable methods to discourage sharing, and consumption will increase. Using this method, the movie industry would kill TV and make Billions.

    • by Xelios (822510) on Monday March 29, 2010 @08:51PM (#31664882)
      "Start by reducing the price of Blu-Ray movies to the same price as their DVD counterparts."
      And why stop there? Here's a few other things that need to go:
      • Why are there anti-piracy warnings displayed at the beginning of the movie I just bought? Why can't I skip them?
      • Why are there commercials and trailers in this DVD that I just bought? If I want to see a trailer I'll go look it up online.
      • Region locking? We've had region-free players for a while now, it's pointless and it needs to go.
      • An "extended Directors Cut" version of the same DVD I just bought released a couple months later? Great, thanks, I love wasting money.
      • Yes, I see your flashy menu. It's nice. Now can we get on with the playing of the movie please? No? Oh good, now you're showing me all the funny parts of the movie in the menu before I've even seen the movie. Can I turn subtitles off now? More animation? All I did was press a button, I don't need a damn light show congratulating me on it.

      Sigh. You're very bad people.

  • by Jackie_Chan_Fan (730745) on Monday March 29, 2010 @07:45PM (#31664134)

    This to me reads as "Warner Brothers is ripping off intelligent college students"

    Keep your shitty check. If you want to pay people to do your dirty work, you better pay them a damn good wage.

    I dont know of any US or UK mercenaries who work for minimum wage.

    • by cptdondo (59460) on Monday March 29, 2010 @08:28PM (#31664638) Journal

      Actually, I expect the pirates to be at the head of the line. At least, if I was in the business of stealing content, what better way to get to know the enemy?

      And, for the icing on the cake, I get a paycheck for it! Yippee! Where do I sign up?

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by glwtta (532858)
      This to me reads as "Warner Brothers is ripping off intelligent college students"

      If they were intelligent, they wouldn't be getting ripped off, now would they?
  • by John Hasler (414242) on Monday March 29, 2010 @07:49PM (#31664184) Homepage

    > causing general frustration amongst the file-sharing population on the
    > Internet.

    Make that unauthorized file-sharing. There are people who have no interest WB's crap: they are unaffected.

  • Epic? (Score:2, Funny)

    by Eggbloke (1698408)

    The intern will literally be on the front-lines of the epic battle against pirated content

    I'm not sure court cases can be described as epic...

  • by erroneus (253617) on Monday March 29, 2010 @07:52PM (#31664212) Homepage

    When fighting nature, either nature always wins or everyone loses. In this case, they are fighting artistic and entertainment nature. Art and entertainment need to be free and need to be shared. It is an important part of what it means to be a human being. What big media is doing is wrong in the sense that they think they can control and limit and even "bottle up" art and entertainment to maximize their profits.

    What people are doing with their collecting and sharing is natural human behavior. It doesn't feel like a "crime" to most people to share because it's quite natural and it's everywhere.

    And please, I have heard the arguments before "but people wouldn't create if there were no money in it!" Pure nonsense. Fan films and other amateur work if littering the internet like never before. People love creating and building and showing off. They don't do it for money. They do it for attention or as an outlet or just to make people smile. Yes, there are many who are attracted to the media market because there is a lot of money to be made, but that's not why the TALENTED people do it... just the greedy ones.

  • Won't work (Score:5, Insightful)

    by allometry (840925) on Monday March 29, 2010 @07:53PM (#31664224)

    When you pirate a movie, you don't have to contend with ads, previews or screens you can't force your way past. When you legitimately buy a movie, you are forced to watch previews, get stuck waiting for the FBI warning and often times contend with other annoyances.

    Perhaps shafting your legitimate clients isn't the best way to do business?

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by h4rr4r (612664)

      Get a better DVD player. VLC is great at skipping that crap, dealing with scratched discs and upscaling.

    • Re:Won't work (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Hurricane78 (562437) <deletedNO@SPAMslashdot.org> on Monday March 29, 2010 @08:19PM (#31664532)

      When you legitimately buy a movie

      There is no such thing as buying a movie... unless maybe if you are the producer.
      Since you only get a license for limited use.

      But even if you could freely use it, there still is no such thing as ownership of information. Because ownership is defined as having certain abilities, like control over it. Which for information, is only possible, if it has never left your mind. But then you can also not prove its existence.
      As soon as you let it out, you just split control with whoever received it.

      Which means that it’s absurd to speak of “ownership”, when talking about information.
      Information is free. Period. And just like with gravity, there is nothing, anyone can do about it.

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by Chuck Chunder (21021)

        There is no such thing as buying a movie... unless maybe if you are the producer. Since you only get a license for limited use.

        That's funny, all the times I've bought a DVD I've never recieved such a license. Can you tell me what law necessitates that I have a licence to watch a DVD?

    • Re:Won't work (Score:5, Insightful)

      by calmofthestorm (1344385) on Monday March 29, 2010 @08:32PM (#31664678)

      The problem is that these are people used to legislating their way to a business model. They have laws to create artifical scarcity, perpetual copyright, and once ACTA passes their own private police and lawyer force on tax dollars. If they viewed it as "competition" they might have a chance.

      Instead, a whole generation of children are being raised with absolutely no respect for the copywrite bullshit. I don't think this is entirely due to the MAFIAA, but they are a contributing factor. Kids look at their BS ads about how "piracy is no different from stealing a tangible good" and realize the facts just don't add up...just like my generation looked at the "smoke marihuana once and become a crack whore" ads from DARE, GREAT, etc. All those lulzy comics about the kid who downloaded a song being dragged into criminal court (technically possible under DMCA but never happened yet -- good luck proving it beyond a reasonable doubt.), it just adds to the cynicism and disillusionment. The vast majority of people just don't give a fuck, and those who do don't tend to swallow this bs.

      I'm not really sure precisely where this is going, but I do have to say that the fundamental disconnect in perception here is going to make for quite the firefight. After all, the internet interprets censorship as damage and routes around it.

    • Re:Won't work (Score:5, Informative)

      by Symbha (679466) on Monday March 29, 2010 @09:16PM (#31665126)

      The Invention of Lying had *Literally* 20 minutes of previews.
      You could not skip them.
      You could not reach the title screen through top, or menu.
      You could not scan through them (at the end of the first trailer, it would simply repeat.)
      Ultimately had to use a title/chapter search feature of my dvd player to get to the title.

      20 minutes of unskippable bullshit? seriously, it made me want to crack the disk before sending it back to netflix.

  • P2P developers routinely receive offers to work for anti-p2p companies, developing against themselves. And not offers to help develop proper measures to control the copyright status of the shared files, but to create ways to disrupt their own networks, or other p2p networks, in clever ways. While I understand that contacting the more knowledgeable people in the field seems like the best move, this news item only proves that they can get the point after receiving a "Fuck you" answer over and over again...
  • by Triv (181010) on Monday March 29, 2010 @08:06PM (#31664386) Journal
    Wow. I used to think being a dorm RA was the fast-lane to friendlessness, but clearly this is worse.
  • Meant in the metaphorical sense, get your mind out of the gutter!

  • by Hurricane78 (562437) <deletedNO@SPAMslashdot.org> on Monday March 29, 2010 @08:12PM (#31664450)

    My grandmother told me, that when the Nazis took over Luxemburg (our country), there were people who collaborated with the Nazis. They were called “Gielemännchen“ (yellow mankins), and often wore yellow rain coats. Everyone hated them.

    Wanna know what happened to them when the Nazis were gone?
    They were brutally killed by the villagers. Every single one of them. Often in cruel ways and with blunt objects.

    So beware, if you dare to collaborate with the enemy. Cause they might not be there, when we come for you later.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      They were called “Gielemännchen“ (yellow mankins), and often wore yellow rain coats. Everyone hated them.

      Wanna know what happened to them when the Nazis were gone? They were brutally killed by the villagers.

      Remember me to never use a yellow raincoat in Luxemburg.

  • I'd do it. (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Bill, Shooter of Bul (629286) on Monday March 29, 2010 @09:12PM (#31665090) Journal

    Two reasons:

    1) I agree that the majority of file sharing is illegal.

    2) I agree that the media companies are pretty evil. I should learn all I can about them and they should learn all they can about me. They need help figuring out the best ways to curb piracy, and make their own offerings more palatable to the general public. They should be allowed to make money for their work, but their should be harsher limits on their control of media. If they want me fighting for them, they'll need to agree to reform.

  • By what means (Score:3, Insightful)

    by esocid (946821) on Monday March 29, 2010 @09:16PM (#31665128) Journal
    Are they going to upload fake torrents, because that already happens, and thanks to ratings, the fakes are found and banned.
    Are they going to pack viruses in torrents? That already happens, maybe not by them, but see above.
    Are they going to upload fake articles (because this is where the leechers [seeders] get their material).
    Are they going to troll irc and try to trade with people....Does this seriously happen still? It's not 1995.

    I thought we'd already cleared up that the legal avenues that the **AAs pursue are scurrilous already, and anything of this nature would start to be illegal.

    The intern could also learn a very valuable lesson that the studios would have no interest in hearing. The underground exists because you aren't doing anything to monetize on it. You put out an inferior product that is crippled, and what these people offer is what everyone wants. An easy to obtain, high quality media product, without all the garbage that you force people to accept (unskippable menus, DRM, non-digital stores). You'd still see people not willing to pay, but you'd see profits skyrocket if you'd just accept that this is what people want instead of fighting it, and pretending it's still 1991.
  • by Opportunist (166417) on Monday March 29, 2010 @09:25PM (#31665184)

    "I was young, and I needed the money!"

  • Narcs (Score:3, Informative)

    by earlymon (1116185) on Monday March 29, 2010 @10:39PM (#31665794) Homepage Journal

    That's what we called 'em when I was in college - exact same principles - exact same ensnarements.

    The intern will literally be on the front-lines of the epic battle against pirated content, ensnaring users in incriminating transactions, issuing takedown requests, and causing general frustration amongst the file-sharing population on the Internet.

    Exact same cluelessness, all the way around.

  • by seeker_1us (1203072) on Monday March 29, 2010 @10:49PM (#31665864)

    Nowhere does it say anything about verifying that the employer has any legal rights to the alleged "pirate" material.

    During the 12 month internship, duties will include: monitoring local Internet forums and IRC for pirated WB and NBCU content and in order to gather information on pirate sites, pirate groups and other pirate activities; finding new and maintaining existing accounts on private sites; scanning for links to hosted pirated WB and NBCU content and using tools to issue takedown requests; maintaining and developing bots for Internet link scanning system (training provided); preparing sending of infringement notices and logging feedback; performing trap purchases of pirated product and logging results; inputting pirate hard goods data and other intelligence into the forensics database; selecting local keywords and submitting local filenames for monitoring and countermeasure campaigns and periodically producing research documents on piracy related technological developments. Various training will be provided.

  • by chord.wav (599850) on Monday March 29, 2010 @10:50PM (#31665872) Journal
    "I was young and I needed the money" isn't what it used to be...
  • One word ... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by daveime (1253762) on Tuesday March 30, 2010 @12:49AM (#31666586)

    Entrapment.

    ensnaring users in incriminating transactions

    The police aren't allowed to do this, why are movie studios ?

    Maybe the authors of torrent clients should implement an IP checklist, so that any known movie studio IPs that are found to be seeding get snapshotted and can be included in court submissions as illegal entrapment tactics.

  • Short lifed career (Score:3, Insightful)

    by LostMyBeaver (1226054) on Tuesday March 30, 2010 @02:16AM (#31667076)
    Taking a pirate and turning them into corporate drones where they have ready availability to free media (I used to get a box of 100 DVDs at a time for free from Warner) makes it so that their pirate instincts turn dull quickly. Fact is, while these guys would be resourceful in the beginning, they would quickly become dead weight since they'd stop thinking like pirates.

    It would make more sense to hire computer science graduates and have the work on the problem from a technical aspect as opposed to the social aspect.
  • by unity100 (970058) on Tuesday March 30, 2010 @05:12AM (#31667908) Homepage Journal

    "Duke of Cornwall hires Swiss mercenaries to crack down on illegal trading of grain to protect his hereditary rights"

    history repeats itself. if you let groups and people become feudal lords, they crack down on the people,f or their 'rights'. whats absurd that, after a point, they start to define what is a 'right' themselves, totally free of the people's will.

    see, copyright was intended for 20 or so years at the start. now its 90 years. trademark was invented to protect well known brand names, now it has become something that you can lay claim to words, anywhere, any use. patents were supposedly to spur innovation, now they are tools with which you can lay claim to genes, and soon laws of nature. (well because you found them first, right ).

    its stupid. we need to abolish these before we end up with a new, this time intellectual feudal aristocracy.

  • by Cato (8296) on Tuesday March 30, 2010 @08:41AM (#31668998)

    The UK government is rushing through a law on filesharing in the last week of parliamentary business before the general election. It's bypassing the normal line by line debate in committees etc.

    The proposed law, which will become law shortly after April 6th on current plans, will essentially enable the copyright holder to get warning letters sent to those who are believed to be illegally sharing files - these go to the broadband account holder, and if the incidents continue, they can be disconnected (or other unspecified "technical measures" may be taken). It doesn't matter if a family member or guest did the file sharing, or someone freeloading on your WiFi.

    See http://www.openrightsgroup.org/campaigns/disconnection/why-care [openrightsgroup.org] for more details and what to do about this.

    The relevance to this story is that the UK students that Warner is recruiting might well uncover the "filesharing incidents" that would feed into this heavy handed enforcement mechanism.

It is impossible to enjoy idling thoroughly unless one has plenty of work to do. -- Jerome Klapka Jerome

Working...