Film Industry Hires Cyber Hitmen To Take Down Pirates 457
thelostagency writes "Girish Kumar, managing director of Aiplex Software says his company is being hired by the film industry to attack online pirates. He says if a provider did not do anything to remove the link or content hosted on its site, his company would launch what is known as a denial-of-service (DoS) attack on the offending computer server. From the article: 'Kumar said that at the moment most of the payment for his company's services came from the film industry in India. "We are tied up with more than 30 companies in Bollywood. They are the major production houses." As for Hollywood films, he said they, too, used his services.'"
So like (Score:5, Interesting)
Cool, now we can measure the effect of piracy. (Score:5, Interesting)
Let's see a graph of how their earnings went up during the attack.
Re:Really? (Score:3, Interesting)
The MPAA needs to learn the Rules of the Internet. [rulesoftheinternet.com]
Ignorance of the law is no defense.
This will have the same impact as (Score:3, Interesting)
Sounds reasonable to me. (Score:5, Interesting)
We have enough problems with DoS attacks launched by miscreants. So, yeah, maybe some of these ISPs don't take reports seriously, but I do know that not all "copyright enforcement" type actions are well researched...
This one time we got a DMCA takedown notice from a software vendor in Australia for a site run by a department of a local university, for running an unlicensed copy of their software. The DMCA takedown notice was sent to my company because they "couldn't find the contact information" *FOR A UNIVERSITY*. I found it by clicking on the "contact" link on the page they made the takedown request for.
Turns out that the university *DID* have a license for the software, BTW.
I know it's annoying when your stuff gets stolen, but don't go attacking people.
Comment removed (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:What could possibly go wrong. (Score:5, Interesting)
not that I condone what this idiotic company is doing. But how exactly would you manage to get an extradition for him on the basis of crimes commited in another country (where what he is doing isn't illegal), unless you can somehow show the pirates he attacked are on American soil, even then I doubt it would hold up.
IANAL but surely the american companies hiring his company would be somewhat accountable wouldn't they?
Re:Er, (Score:5, Interesting)
Aren't DoS attacks illegal? If so, why not?
They are, and I really wonder if Hollywood (FTFA: "As for Hollywood films, he said they, too, used his services.") wants to really be poking ANOTHER stick into the hornets nest that the internet can be.
The way I see if, for every hundred thousand cookie cutter P2P users, there will be one who is savvy enough, annoyed enough and has the resources to return in kind to Hollywood. And there will be people like me, who don't fit in either bracket, but would certainly offer both refuge to that one person and buy them drinks for their efforts.
Re:Er, (Score:2, Interesting)
So.... does the EFF sue Aiplex, the MPAA or the film owner?
(that's assuming Aiplex is careful not to upset hackers smarter than Aiplex). Do not DDOS Aiplex and if you're caught remember I told you not to do it.
Re:Er, (Score:3, Interesting)
No, this is like sears fighting shoplifting by sending assassins after shoplifters.
DOS attacks are unlikely to kill anyone, unless they rely on VOIP and can't make a call when they have a heart attack.
It's more a store fighting shoplifting by tracking down people they think might be shoplifters and setting fire to their cars.
Lol... I see what you did there. The problem people keep forgetting is that the film industry goes after anyone they THINK is pirating their shit. They never prove any of the accusations they use to justify their actions, which makes them FAR worse than vigilantism.
Re:Er, (Score:4, Interesting)
And when millions of downloaders decide to DDOS Aiplex Software you will have no problem with that either. Remember Make Love Not Spam [makelovenotspam.com]? All we need is a nice screensaver like that and we can DDOS Aiplex right of the internet. The copyright infringers outnumber the copyright holders by millions to one. I'm not sure if what they want is an all out war. DDOS attacks aren't going to solve anyone's problems. All they will do is shut down the internet for everyone. Of course there are some corporations that would love to see that happen.
Instigating a neverending arms race (Score:4, Interesting)
It is a bad business model to go out of your way to piss off *the entire known universe*.
One day somebody with enough brains and too much anger will trump your sorry ass and you will take *years* to recover (even slightly) from the mountain of suffering that will be unleashed against you.
Have these people forgotten Nagasaki and Hiroshima? EVENTUALLY somebody says "STFU or I *will* make you regret it".
Re:Er, (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Er, (Score:5, Interesting)
or I have to wait 6 months
You lost my sympathy right there. I've downloaded ISOs to replace lost or damaged game CDs (my pirate copy of Halo is right there in the case next to the original which you still need for the DRM, since I haven't risked cracking it). I'm quite comfortable with recording hundreds of GB of films from TV because when it comes down to it, I just paid to see them a different way. I can even see your point of view about regional availability, although when it comes down to it, there is this thing called the postal system.
But impatience? The rate of new stuff arriving is constant anyway - enjoy the stuff arriving now, wait your 6 months, and remain entertained. It's not like it's a frickin' vaccine. You can do without it for a while, and meanwhile, there's the vast influx of other stuff that was released 6 months ago.
Re:Er, (Score:3, Interesting)
isn't DMCA only for America (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Wrong wrong wrong (Score:3, Interesting)
If the law were not corrupted to favor the corporations then nothing that Jamie Rasset was sharing would have been in copyright. It all would have EXPIRED into the public domain by the time she was engaging in her piracy. The flagship RIAA anti-piracy case isn't even about current works. It's about "moldy oldies".
Copyright is one of those area where the law itself is grey.
Your rights are supposed to expire.
Some infringers are worse than others.
Some "infringement" is perfectly legal and ethical.
Re:Er, (Score:3, Interesting)
"Moral people" as you would like describe them are extremely, extremely rare.
On the coontrary, most people are moral. It's just that nobody agrees on what's "moral". For instance, some think violence is always immoral, others think that violence in defense of self or property is moral, and some think punching someone in the face because they've been verbally insulted it moral.
The Muslims and Baptists think drinking alcohol is immoral. Some people think any kind of sex except the missionary position is immoral. Some people* think dancing is immoral.
Some think brealing the law is immoral. I think some of the laws themselves are immoral.
Someone who you consider to be immoral simply has a different version of morality than you.
* Q: Why won't baptists have sex standing up?
A: They're afraid someone will see them and think they're dancing!
Corruption (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Wrong wrong wrong (Score:3, Interesting)
"Some "infringement" is perfectly legal and ethical."
You almost had a point, and you had to go and ruin it with this gem.
Infringement is a legal term, so I'm not sure how you can claim that some infringement is legal. The law identifies some circumstances (like fair use) in which an act that would otherwise be infringement is not, by virtue of those circumstances, infringement. (See, e.g., U.S.C. Title 17, Chapter 1, s107.) Such acts are perfectly legal, but then again they are not infringement.
Some infringement should be legal (because, as you note, copyright terms are out of control). You can argue that violating such laws is ethical, if your ethical code endorses civil disobedience. However, you need to remember that civil disobedience includes accepting the social and legal consequences of your actions, even though those consequences be improper and even though your goals largely involve abolishment of those consequences.