How the RIAA Targets Campus Copyright Violators 280
jyosim writes "The Chronicle of Higher Ed got a briefing at RIAA headquarters on how the group catches pirates. They just use LimeWire and other software that pirates use, except that they've set up scripts to search for songs, grab IP numbers, and send out notices to college officials. They claim they don't target specific colleges, though many feel that they do."
Jeoparody (Score:5, Funny)
Not exactly targeting... (Score:5, Insightful)
Harvard anyone? (Score:5, Interesting)
I seem to recall reading somewhere that Harvard has never been hit with one of these RIAA money grabs. Most probable reason being that there is enough talent there to rip the RIAA to tiny ribbon sized shreds in front of the judge, which would pretty much end their extortion racket.
So, does that still hold true? Anybody at Harvard ever been hit with one of these?
Re:Harvard anyone? (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Piracy quite rampant just like any other university, and the students have rarely been served although it does happen.
I agree that they figure high-profile university lawsuits are bad publicity, and Harvard does have many young lawyers anxious for a big win, and will not be easily intimidated, which is half of what the RIAA game is about.
Several of the Harvard students I know have a method of sharing files via a VPN type construct (wasn't rea
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
if you are going to harvard shouldn't you be smart enough not to have a family you can't afford to support?
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
going lawsuit happy on the alma mater isn't usually looked upon to well. especially when on avarage harvard grads are a lot more likely to spend a who
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Not exactly targeting... (Score:4, Funny)
How (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:How (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Judging from the "quality" music they produce these days, it is only logical that they do first check from their captive audience.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
RIAA "making available" (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:RIAA "making available" (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
PS - It's pretty common knowledge among musicians that you are on the hook for production costs not to mention advertising and all sorts of other costs.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Doesn't matter, though. That's not how they're using LimeWire (or other P2P clients), as the GP would've known if he'd RFTA.
They're not making the music available; they're using the client to search for others who are making the music available.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Recent court cases indicate that "making available" is not against the copyright law. The **AA would certainly like that to be the case, so they and they alone are able to "make available" and nobody else. To violate copyright, there has to be an actual copy made by someone.
Re:RIAA "making available" (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:RIAA "making available" (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
In which case, if you download the music from them (the RIAA), then it would seem (IANAL, etc.) that they couldn't possibly charge you with copyright infringement since they, the copyright holder, offered the MP3 for download. Or am I missing something?
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re:RIAA "making available" (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
My understanding is that they search for songs, not serve them...seeing as they usually sue people for serving and not downloading. So I don't think there's any grand kind of entrapment conspiracy going on. They're just doing what normal Limewire users do only capturing the IP address instead.
Of course, the lesson here is to either not serve or use an anonymous proxy (or several) if you'
Re: (Score:2)
Easy answer: War [blackwaterusa.com] by proxy [slashdot.org]...or, to put it in
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
The RIAA maintains a list of songs whose distribution rights are owned by the RIAA's member organizations. It has given that list to Media Sentry, a company it hired to search for online pirates. That company runs copies of the LimeWire program and performs searches for those copyrighted song titles, one by one, to see if any are being offered by people whose computers are connected to the LimeWire network. --- The LimeWire software allows users who right-click on any song entry and choose "browse host" to see all of the songs that a given file sharer is offering to others for download. The software also lists the IP address of active file sharers. --- Using public, online databases (such as those at arin.net or samspade.org), Media Sentry locates the name of the Internet-service provider and determines which traders are located at colleges or universities.
They do however download (and perhaps unintentionally share as well) the mp3s that they're not sure are the right ones. I doubt that RIAA will sue it's own investigators for copyright infringement but on the other hand, they seem pretty desperate. I wonder about "unintentional entrapment" however.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
The RIAA, in so far as they are also "making available", are making available with no clear demarcation of copyright, further complicating their liability well beyond mere "entrapment". So all those downloads from RIAA hosted files are perfectly legal. Making available man_on_the_moon.mp3 is no different than making available kennedy_moon_speech.mp3 whilst sneaking in a secretly copyrighted song into a title of a public domain presidential speech about put
Hate Emails (Score:5, Insightful)
If you risk getting hate mail simply because you work at a certain company, perhaps it's time to look for a different job?
On the other hand, if this guy actually stuck his neck out and shared how the RIAA really finds their suckers, he'd probably get thank you letters rather than hate mail.
In either case, he probably needs to do some deep self-examination to see why he stays at this job.
Re: (Score:2)
Come on, think about Britney Spears
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
"You're fired"
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
In either case, he probably needs to do some deep self-examination to see why he stays at this job.
I often question why people would work at companies that have questionable business practices. I assume that it is similar to the reason why I work at a company that doesn't. (a) They gave me an job offer, and (b) they consistently provide me with a paycheck.
Sadly, there are not enough jobs to go around within companies who have strong morals and upstanding business practices. It is Supply/Demand... and when the demand for employees is highest in immoral organizations, it is no wonder why people end
Target selection (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
While the process for generating both takedown notices and settlement letters is largely automated, the RIAA said that before each warning is sent out, a full-time RIAA employee reviews each case to make sure the claim is legitimate and that the alleged pirate is in the United States. Thanks to the speed and ease of the automated process, though, the RIAA is "able to identify hundreds of instances of infringement on a daily basis," according to RIAA spokeswoman Cara Duckworth. She also 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.
As well as:
On listservs and in interviews, some university administrators have recently questioned the validity of some of these takedown notices because they say they do not have any record of a download at the named IP address at the specified time. RIAA officials said this is because investigators performed only a "handshake."
And the obvious problem that mediasentry still doesn't have a valid license to engage in this type of work. This is neither evidence of offering nor evidence of distribution, this is nothing at all to see here.
This still sounds like racketeering to me, they never did answer the question of why they're singling out Universities in general rather than everybody they "catch" if the evidence is what it is, then they shouldn't be capable of singling out the educat
Change LimeWire EULA now! (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
(most non open source that is)
i wouldn't touch limewire except to punch it but someone else can check
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
BearShare actually did have a EULA that prohibited using it to collect information. It didn't help in any noticeable way. And then the RIAA lawyers beat the bear to death.
Sue LimeWire ... (Score:5, Funny)
arin.net or samspade.org ? (Score:2)
IP is not an identity (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
They will stand on the side of Hollywood, not the side of the citizens. Just like they always have.
Re: (Score:2)
Legality of MediaSentry (Score:5, Interesting)
http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/03/11/1427257 [slashdot.org]
http://news.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/04/10/1542222 [slashdot.org]
Could they not do the same with torrents? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Could they not do the same with torrents? (Score:5, Informative)
Easily.
How does that differ from Limewire?
With a torrent there isn't any way to "see all of the songs that a given file sharer is offering to others", just that one. And in fact, most people only do a few torrents at a time, so even if the RIAA could detect them, it wouldn't sound very impressive. They'd prefer to be able to go into court and say, "Look at this list! This criminal mastermind was distributing 2000 files! But we're only asking money for the five that we actually downloaded."
no capability of targeting any school? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Time to do a counter-sting (Score:2, Interesting)
Create an audio file with the same name as a popular song, have the first 7-8 seconds or whatever is legal be the same as the song, followed by an oral essay that critiques the song.
Now, when they sue, not only will you have a bulletproof argument that the suit is without merit, you will have a good counter-suit on the grounds that they are trying to suppress legitimate free speech.
At the very least, this wi
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Hint: neither file name nor first few seconds being the same will do it.
Re: (Score:2)
This Is At Odds With... (Score:2)
So which is it?
And do Slashdot readers know what the legal term "estopple" means?
Why The RIAA Has No Case (Score:5, Interesting)
This is why the RIAA has no legal case, and why they must resort to bluffs, threats, extortion, smoke, mirrors, and press releases.
The song file has to be downloaded by another unauthorized person (RIAA investigators don't count) for it to be infringement. The RIAA itself admits here that they have no way of knowing if anybody else has ever downloaded this song. To properly win in court they have to convince judges and/or juries that despite this complete lack of proof that they were infringed anyway.
It's all the Big Lie on their part.
Is it reasonable? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Basically "attempted copyright infringement" does not exist. If the song was never distributed, then infringement did not occur.
Re:Is it reasonable? NO! (Score:2)
No, Mr. Troll! The song that a search returns could have gotten on that computer by many other methods (ripped from CD, loaded from a memory stick, downloaded from an authorized on-line music store, copied from a previous hard drive, placed there by a trojan) than being illegally downloaded.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
No, that was an "authorized" copy. Authorized by the copyright holders themselves as part of the investigation. The work has not been infringed by authorized copies.
And I think you already knew this since you know that MediaSentry is unlicensed in every state.
A humorous solution (Score:5, Interesting)
1) Figure out what music is currently quite popular.
2) Make your own covers of it without instruments. Sing both the lyrics and the melody with interpretive musicianship. The worse it sounds, the better.
3) Host as the file name.
4) ????
5) Waste their time!
IANAL but I don't think you could get in trouble for posting fake songs up. Technically, you could claim you're helping fight piracy while making Mediasentry's job harder. I imagine the in worst case they ask you to cease and desist. Perhaps someone more versed in law can say if this is valid.
Another option could be to simply use the band's name and make up fake songs with similar names to original songs with fictitious lyrics. This would replace step 2. Granted I believe they are solely looking for song titles.
Ben Folds - Rocking the Penguin
Beastie Boys - Ubuntu in Effect
Whitney Houston - OSX will save the day
Re:A humorous solution (Score:5, Insightful)
You are correct that the easiest way to defeat the methods they deploy is to flood them with garbage, but how is the casual user supposed to filter out the garbage without The Man doing the same?
The closest analogue I can think of would be currency. The Treasury Department changes the design every few years because it takes a while for counterfeiters to, reverse engineer, develop copy techniques, and perfect methods for mass production. By the time that's complete a new bill is in circulation.
Yea they havent been targeting specific colleges (Score:2)
Make your own song (Score:3, Interesting)
2) rename it as a popular song: eg. Madonna - 4 Minutes
3) they download it after it fails hash check
4) sue them for copyright infringement
5) ?
6) Profit!
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
If this is true, why those non-computer owners? (Score:2)
=======
If there is a match, Media Sentry investigators will then engage in a so-called TCP connection, or an electronic "handshake," with the computer that is offering the file to verify that the computer is online and is ready to share the song.
=======
If they're going so far as to verify that the "computer is online and is ready to share the song", then explain to me how they can make the sort of mistakes they do, what with some targets having not engaged in filesharing at all?
Remember, if they ar
Entrap them right back. (Score:2, Interesting)
college safety and reviews (Score:3, Interesting)
Although some kids may need to reign in their activities, the RIAA methods' technological and litigation basis are unsound and dangerous. RIAA and their overlords need to be made recipocally accountable with the colleges taking more responsibility too.
Deception? (Score:2, Interesting)
I'm glad I don't need to worry about the RIAA... (Score:2, Insightful)
Hashes (Score:2)
In collecting evidence for those takedown notices, Media Sentry investigators do not usually download suspect music files. Instead, the company uses special software to check the "hash," a sort of unique digital fingerprint, of each offered file to verify that it is identical to a copyrighted song file in the RIAA's database.
What is this all about? It makes it sound like they have a checksum for the digital recording of each RIAA song, and compare it against the files on the P2P system. But there are an unlimited number of files that a given song might be made into, by using different formats, bitrates, encoders settings, ID3 tags, and so on. What exactly are these hashes of?
What, NEVER? No. NEVER! Well, hardly ever. (Score:4, Interesting)
In other words, they do not engage in unauthorized downloading and copyright infringement. Except when they do. Because they what sounds to them like a really good rationalization for their behavior.
Which is exactly what their victims do.
If the RIAA being straight arrows, they'd forego the downloading in those "rare" cases. Why is it so important to nail these "rare" that they will compromise their own principles?
Perhaps, if the truth were known, those "rare" cases aren't really all that rare.
The 3 key points in the article (Score:5, Informative)
1. MediaSentry is a customer of Audible Magic software, the software in which Dr. Jacobson has an indirect financial interest, and uses Audible Magic software as part of its investigation. So when Dr. Jacobson testifies about how reliable MediaSentry is, he's talking about his customer, and when he testified that he doesn't know what their procedures are, he was lying.
2. The software process used by MediaSentry differs markedly from the way Richard Gabriel has sought to describe it in his representations to various courts.
3. Cara Duckworth, the RIAA's spokesperson, admits that
Re: (Score:2)
Chicago ordinance will put an end to independents (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Maybe capitalism really does promote darwanism (Score:5, Interesting)
That's the real reason behind these suits. They can't possibly be afraid you'll hear top 40 crap, because if they did they wouldn't let the radio (easily sampled to better than iTunes or MP3 quality) play them.
It isn't Britney they want to keep out of your ears, it's the indies. Note they don't say "illegal downloads" except when the context infers that all downloads are illegal? Their aim, mostly met, it to make you think they do indeed have a monopoly (or rather, cartel) and that all music is RIAA music. it worked on you, didn't it?
"Piracy" isn't hurting their sales and they know it. The indies (and the gasoline and food companies) are eating their lunch. Most of us have only so many dollars to spend. If I buy four $5 CDs from the band that plays at the bar (professionally recorded and duplicated, with art and packaging) that's twenty dollars I don't have to buy an RIAA CD.
Their only hope for survival is to kill the internet. Good luck with that.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Maybe capitalism really does promote darwanism (Score:4, Insightful)
But by the same token, the larger the group, the more idiots will be in that group, and the higher the likelyhood that some of them will be exceptionally stupid.
That also follows for competence.
The larger the group, the greater the need for organization. Above a certain critical limit, the bureaucracy bogs the effectiveness down.
But I don't see how this applies to evolution.
Re:Maybe capitalism really does promote darwanism (Score:5, Interesting)
I agree. In addition, this is one big reason why their "lost sales" calculations are huge stinking loads of bull manure. The RIAA figures that 1 song downloaded (regardless of the legality of the download) equals one sale not made which means that much revenue not put in their pockets. You could easily use the same reasoning to prove that Indie labels cost the record labels money. Or that food store sales cost the record companies money. Or that oil companies cost the record companies money.
Hey, there's an idea. Pit the Big Oil companies against the Big Record Companies/RIAA. Two Companies Enter! One leaves! We won't really be cheering for a winner so much as cheering for one of the companies to be beaten to a pulp.
Re: (Score:2)
Their only hope for survival is to kill the internet.
I think Electronic Arts would take issue with that strategy when their users lose the ability to play their DRM'd games that "phone home".
(Yes, yes, I know that they "changed their minds" in regard to the phone home policy, but that doesn't mean they can't be the symbolic whipping boy until the next moronic company suggests this).
On the other hand, without the internet, Microsoft's Operating System would actually be secured (and what better way to kill off Google than by killing the Internetwork it ru
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
The RIAA has it good. Judges love them and rubber-stamp their motions in courts, they have the ear of the politicians, and every dime coming in is tax free, heading to their legal team's Maybach fund.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
As far as I know, taxation of civil judgments is common. Certain awards are probably excluded from income, but not to the extent you seem to think so.
A quick google search has at least one law firm saying exactly this: Taxation of Legal Damages [hapmaylaw.com]:
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
I agree with the statement "A false sense of security is worse than no security at all."
Check this thread
http://forums.whirlpool.net.au/forum-replies-archive.cfm/488917.html
Re:If you P2P then use protection. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:If you P2P then use protection. (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Peerguardian is better than nothing. But not by a lot. It maybe keeps the MafIAA from spotting you from their own IP address, but sometimes they neglect to inform PG when the IP numbers change. The MafIAA is perfectly capable of getting online via their local cable system (or one in Russia, for that matter, the tubes go everywhere), or registering a domain under an assumed name, or doing it from their mom's basement.
Re: (Score:2)
It may be a fairly straightforward system, but it's also potentially quite effective. The point of the Gnutella network is to search the network, and people label files to help searchers find them (otherwise, little point in sharing). Harness that and collect IPs from them, and you have a list of potential infringers. Sure, there are plenty of ways to "beat the system"