digg

Join DiggAbout

Donkeys and Elephants and Delegates,oh my!
Check out the most popular Elections 2008 content on Digg.

The RIAA Explains How It Catches Alleged Music Pirates

chronicle.com — 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

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • serrebi, on 05/14/2008, -17/+140***** the riaa!
    • quarby, on 05/14/2008, -11/+3dugg!
    • pigfister, on 05/14/2008, -1/+24Boycott anti consumer *****.

      The BPI Are: SONY, UNIVERSAL, WARNER GROUP, EMI.

      The RIAA Soundexchange Are: SONY, UNIVERSAL, WARNER GROUP, EMI.

      The IFPI Are: The same anti consumer lot as listed above!

      The MPAA Are: SONY, UNIVERSAL, WARNER GROUP, DISNEY, PARAMOUNT, FOX.
    • ElbertF, on 05/14/2008, -0/+35░▒▓████░ ▒▓█░░▒▓█ ░░▒▓███░ ▒▓█░░▒▓█
      ▒▓█░░░▒▓ ▒▓█░░▒▓█ ▒▓█░░░▒▓ ▒▓█░▒▓█
      ▒▓███░░░ ▒▓█░░▒▓█ ▒▓█░░░░░ ▒▓████
      ▒▓█░░░░░ ▒▓█░░▒▓█ ▒▓█░░░▒▓ ▒▓█░░▒▓█
      ▒▓█░░░░░ ░░▒▓████ ░░▒▓███░ ▒▓█░░▒▓█

      ░▒▓████░ ▒▓█████░ ░░▒▓██░░ ░░▒▓██
      ▒▓█░░▒▓█ ░░▒▓█░░░ ░▒▓█░▓█░ ░▒▓█░▓█
      ▒▓████░░ ░░▒▓█░░░ ▒▓██████ ▒▓██████
      ▒▓█░░▒▓█ ░░▒▓█░░░ ▒▓█░░▒▓█ ▒▓█░░▒▓█
      ▒▓█░░▒▓█ ▒▓█████░ ▒▓█░░▒▓█ ▒▓█░░▒▓█
  • tylerromes, on 05/14/2008, -13/+25The RIAA just scares me, there's no two ways about it. I learned to avoid the RIAA the hard way, so now i am just on nutsie.com a lot.

    Take a peek:
    http://www.nutsie.com/member/view_member/121747?pl ...
    Free, streaming and LEGAL.
    • Phyltre, on 05/14/2008, -1/+31Fear won't serve you. Don't let your life be driven by fear.
      • fkr3, on 05/14/2008, -9/+4It's fear of being caught for doing the wrong thing. The goal should be to not do the wrong thing, not to fear the consequences.
        • RealmDown, on 05/14/2008, -1/+20No, the goal is to do the RIGHT thing and not fear the consequences of those in power who use money and influence to FORCE compliance based on their own self-defined, profit motivated rules.
          • fkr3, on 05/14/2008, -9/+2Taking something you want but don't feel like paying for is not the right thing no matter how much you kid yourself.
          • RealmDown, on 05/14/2008, -1/+8"Oh Mr. Washington! Hey George! The ***** above me says to PUT THE TEA BACK!"

          • fkr3, on 05/14/2008, -4/+2Uh right. Nobody's holding a gun to your head saying you *have* to have music. Nobody's forcing you to buy or pirate music from the record labels either - there are plenty of legally free alternatives.

            You are only required to buy their music if you *want* their music, which is a fundamental part of how any business operates.
          • RealmDown, on 05/14/2008, -0/+3"Uh right."

            Thank you for agreeing and coming around.
          • WorldGroove, on 05/14/2008, -0/+6@fkr3
            I think what this whole Music Piracy thing is about, is that people no longer believe sub-quality albums are worth $20(I pay like $36 for Japanese albums in places like JapanTown SanFrancisco). They might like a track or 2, but the whole album isn't worth the cash.
            I kinda think of this music piracy thing as a way to show those in charge, that they need to come up with another way of selling music, or start making more quality tunes instead of "manufacturing" pop-icons and expecting everyone to buy their albums that might have 1 or 2 good tracks. Also, I hear that artists don't get much of the profits. I'm not sure how true that is; I've seen "cribs" on MTV - they don't seem to be doing too bad =^P But I guess alot of non-mainstream artists find it hard to break into the biz, since record-labels only want the same tired stuff that ensures money in their pockets.

            Hopefully all this music-piracy will eventually bring about change... and hopefully it'll be the kind of change that lets non-mainstream artist get a chance at reaching alot of people(thus becoming mainstream?)... and ultimately better music variety and choices for all.

            My 2 cents...
          • fkr3, on 05/14/2008, -2/+1The price argument doesn't really pack any merit because the piracy is occuring on the internet, where you can buy individual tracks for under a dollar and albums for much less than in brick and mortar stores.
          • stabbingkittens, on 05/14/2008, -1/+2fkr3, you ***** troll. Don't you have something better to do than trawling through digg to convert us file-sharing heathens? Or are you being paid commission by the copyright cops?
      • greevar, on 05/14/2008, -0/+5Fear is the path to the dark side. I sense much fear in you.
        • TheKingInYellow, on 05/14/2008, -1/+1"No duh" is a product of fear.
    • jcaino, on 05/14/2008, -3/+3thats awesome.
      • CryRightardCry, on 05/14/2008, -0/+2You didn't bother to go look at it, or you wouldn't say that.
        • jcaino, on 05/15/2008, -0/+1indeed i did. as a blackberry user, the site is very relevant to me.
    • bradysdaman, on 05/14/2008, -1/+7what the heck makes that legal? Looks just as illegal as Lime Wire.
      • burrgrinder, on 05/14/2008, -1/+1Difficult question that can be answered by simply scrolling to the footer of any of their pages and clicking "about us".

        http://www.nutsie.com/melodeo/

        They are partnered with the music companies, that's how it's legal.
        • CryRightardCry, on 05/14/2008, -0/+4LOL
          What a load of crap.
          They don't sell music, they let you SHARE ITUNES PLAYLISTS.
          Going out of business in 3, 2, 1......
      • bbliss17, on 05/14/2008, -0/+4use torrents man, get with the times
      • retardo9, on 05/14/2008, -0/+0I read one of their press-releases a while ago, they're legal because they pay royalties to the record companies.
    • Jaliyl, on 05/14/2008, -2/+3Why is this spam being dugg up?
    • CryRightardCry, on 05/14/2008, -0/+2You are full of crap.
      Looks like Nutsie is just a way to move files into other formats, so it CERTAINLY doesn't fill the need of someone who is looking for music.
      Thanks for the crappy spam.
      Ah, your profile makes it clear you are just some nutsie spam prick.

      • CountSpongeBob, on 05/14/2008, -1/+1Hi Bradysdaman,

        I work on nuTsie, and the nuTsie service is covered by the webcasting rules (like Pandora or last.fm), with royalties being paid per the webcasting rules. The music streamed to you is based on your playlists (not the actual music media files) that you upload from your
        iTunes collection. This is completely different than a p2p download site where users can put up copyrighted content for download - there are no copyrighted downloads on the nuTsie site.

        -Bob
  • Pogojoe, on 05/14/2008, -4/+51One music pirate down, 42,457,798 to go....
    • scooterbaga, on 05/14/2008, -0/+16That number seems low...
      • xkorbin, on 05/14/2008, -0/+1In terms of general piracy, I can not attest to Music Piracy in particular, China already takes the cake with a huge number.
    • AriaStar, on 05/14/2008, -0/+6Their method reminds me of how the government is capturing terrorists. Torture a large enough group of people and the odds are you'll have one in the bunch. Who cares about the innocent people, there's one terrorist in the group. Success!
      • Seth024, on 05/14/2008, -2/+6Not much of a success really. I remember a story about a German Nazi officer about 4 months ago. He told them the information you got from just talking to someone was a lot more useful than the information you get from torturing them. This is because only a small percent of the population has something important to hide. All the innocent people gave fake information during torture which made the information got from torturing pretty useless.
        • dvrchatter, on 05/14/2008, -1/+1...because Nazis are renowned sources of reliable information. Coming up next, Seth024 quotes Pol Pot on unionization and labor rights.
        • stabbingkittens, on 05/14/2008, -1/+3That's common knowledge among police organisations. I watched a Guantanamo doco last night about their use of torture, and officers said the same thing. Seth could quote Pol Pot on a variety of things and be right. The source matters little.
          • dvrchatter, on 05/15/2008, -1/+1I'm just saying come on, quoting Nazis? What a bunch of dupes. At least in today's modern world a charismatic evil liar can't memorize an entire generation just based on the convincing manner in which he speaks.
            Ooops. Barack Hussein Obama. Never mind.
        • stabbingkittens, on 05/16/2008, -1/+1-tried to comment above, new system wouldn't let me-
          Today's world is far from modern, and I would say George W Bush had mesmerized the majority of the United States into backing war, although that blundering idiot is far from charismatic. The benefit of hind-sight allows us to look at those under Nazi rule with bewilderment as to how they could allow millions of innocents to be murdered. That will probably never happen again, but there a millions of intelligent, caring people living comfortable lives who support the view that Muslims are the enemy of the West. This is undeniable, and fits exactly under a mesmerized generation. People tend to listen to those who yell loudest.
        • dvrchatter, on 05/16/2008, -0/+1I'm sure the 296 members of Congress and 77 Senators (including Clinton, Edwards, Kerry, Daschle, Feinstein, Reid and Schumer) who supported the Iraq action had nothing to do with the public's support of it. The only difference between their position and Bush's is that none of them have the balls to finish what they started. That's what happens when you stick your finger in the wind to test the air as a means of governing.

          7 years + 0 Homeland Attacks = We're doing something right. Whatever methods we're using are effective enough for me considering the results, regardless of what a dried up old Nazi has to say about them.

          Analogies only work if they're analogous. Nazi Rule != Run up to Iraq War for any reasonable individual. Two generations equally mesmerized (to the point of fainting at the site of and applauding the sneezes of) a smooth talking hate filled liar is a lot more appropriate.
    • bbliss17, on 05/14/2008, -1/+1lol
  • lukekim91, on 05/14/2008, -27/+7were in ur internetzz watching u download our moviez
  • coheedcollapse, on 05/14/2008, -5/+78It'd be awesome to share a bunch of self-made MP3's with names of RIAA-owned artists plastered on them. Just ***** to waste their time. It'd be even better if thousands of people did it.
    • houndeyex, on 05/14/2008, -4/+29...and it would piss people off every time they downloaded one of them by mistake.
      • Chassit, on 05/14/2008, -2/+29Who the ***** cares, Limewire users get exactly what they deserve.
        • stabbingkittens, on 05/15/2008, -0/+1Dugg up. Isn't that an oxymoron? Anything is possible on Digg.
          'Don't dig down, dig up, stupid.'
      • DeathfireD, on 05/14/2008, -0/+1Not if their client had Hash search.
    • BoneheadFarker, on 05/14/2008, -1/+25You assume they actually care whether you have the content or not...
    • halleyscomet, on 05/14/2008, -0/+36Oh, you'd still be sued. they don't care about the actual content.
      • bigsteve, on 05/14/2008, -1/+8If it matches by title, it goes through two fingerprinting hashing processes and if it fails both of those identification methods, it gets flagged to be listened to by an actual person doing the investigating.
        • yunus, on 05/14/2008, -0/+9Hey thats not Metallica, dammit I just got rickrolled by Pirates!
          Obviously this would require Rick Astley's approval, or really the approval of his recording company.
        • mrsteveman1, on 05/14/2008, -0/+7Yea except they claim a download never actually takes place in that article, they say near the end that only a TCP handshake took place, which means unless limwire PROVIDES them with a hash, they don't have one.
          • shark72, on 05/14/2008, -0/+3You're exactly correct: Limewire provides enough metadata as part of the handshake (not a TCP handshake per se) to generate a hash. As I mentioned in my other post, possibly not 100% foolproof, but close enough.
    • macdude22, on 05/14/2008, -0/+35When I was working help desk at a university a couple 4 years back we routinely received these take down notices. Our process was to identify the port the IP address was issued to at the time of the infringment (as listed on the complaint), disable their connection, have them remove the requested file, give them some information on copyright infringement and let them go on their way. I had a DMCA take down notice for a user sharing Old School. Well turns out the kid was sharing a home video called Old School, nothing infringed. It was at that point I realized these ass clowns sending out these notices don't check jack squat, and just do a search for offending file names sending out big scary letters of horse *****. Aught to be some recourse for the false positives from these donkeys but you know, the little folk don't have the politicians in their pocket.
      • shark72, on 05/14/2008, -5/+3Take a look at the article. "False positives" used to be a huge problem so they've had to improve their process -- now they compare the file against hashes, and if it fails, a real person actually has to listen to it (thus coheedcollapse's comment about sharing fake stuff to waste the time of the RIAA's paid listeners).

        I don't know if the MPAA has taken similar steps due to false positives. With the huge amount of fakes out there, I'm guessing they've had to.
        • mrsteveman1, on 05/14/2008, -1/+8"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.""

          No download = no hash, meaning false positives are going to happen.
          • shark72, on 05/14/2008, -0/+3They hash it using the metadata provided by LimeWire. No download is necessary (this is also covered in the article, but briefly). I suppose it's possible to generate a fake file that generates the same hash, but this is one of those edge conditions -- in the old days, the false positives were because somebody happened to be sharing a legal file that had a file name similar copyrighted file.
      • Pfkninenines, on 05/14/2008, -0/+2Apparently that's what they used to do at my university up until a few years back as well. Now we're fined $100 too. So far no lawsuits though.
    • robbob, on 05/14/2008, -0/+17During the Napster days they would insert a highpitch squeal in the track to blow out your ears.
      • bbliss17, on 05/14/2008, -0/+4I remember those days
      • BoneheadFarker, on 05/14/2008, -0/+16I thought I got one of those one day. Turns out it was a mislabelled Celine Dion song...
        • rezonq3, on 05/14/2008, -0/+7Spit out my coffee on that one. Well done!
      • MrWhite7, on 05/14/2008, -2/+1What?
  • JimmySpaza, on 05/14/2008, -3/+50Try using PeerGuardian. It supposedly blocks IP addresses, and thus connections, from suspect computers on the internet, such as RIAA. I guess it works, if PeerGuardian keeps their banned IP address list current.
    • FecalHurler, on 05/14/2008, -0/+14Yeah it updates the IP addresses every time you start it up.
      Peer Guardian + IP Ghost....=Pure win.
      • redbna, on 05/14/2008, -0/+4I understand the use of Peer Guardian. What does IP Ghost do for you?
      • karlid, on 05/14/2008, -0/+6Just went to "http://www.ipghost.com/" and got this error: "No Such Domain - Jim check to be sure SQL server is running."

        Awesome. I hope 'Jim' is available.
    • prophetpimp, on 05/14/2008, -0/+14Also disable Browser host ability. If they can't see your collection they cant sue you. Get caught for downloading one track is way way better then getting caught with your whole library exposed.
      • skinnyskittles, on 05/14/2008, -4/+5how do i disable the browser host ability?
      • skinnyskittles, on 05/14/2008, -6/+3why dig me down if you can't answer my question?
      • toliseju, on 05/14/2008, -0/+2yeah what do you mean by that?
      • troye, on 05/14/2008, -0/+2Don't use LimeWire. If your on Digg, then you better not use Lime. Use bittorrent.
    • WhereAmI, on 05/14/2008, -1/+4PeerGuardian 2 is false hope.
    • bbliss17, on 05/14/2008, -0/+1I use that and it works well but takes a lot of memory
    • moonasha, on 05/14/2008, -0/+1peer guardian only gives you a false sense of security. While it MAY ban some "facilities", it also probably bans a bunch of valid peers.

      And also, whats to stop Joe Shmoe the RIAA grunt from finding out about peerguardian (which they probably do know bout), and bringing his laptop to the starbucks next door and busting your ass there?

      And how much do you want to bet those places have deals with their ISP to have their IPs changed very frequently to counteract such measures?
  • Beylan, on 05/14/2008, -2/+66I think their methods involve a phonebook and some darts.
    • livestradamus, on 05/14/2008, -1/+13Or the obituaries section of the paper
    • gasin, on 05/14/2008, -2/+2poison darts - to be precise!
  • h0stile17, on 05/14/2008, -4/+99"A search on Madonna's latest release, "4 Minutes," turned up more than a hundred users trading various copies of the song"

    And there it is. The secret to not getting caught is to not download ***** music.
    • onesidedsquare, on 05/14/2008, -1/+22the real secret is to not use limewire or others like it, just use news groups and bittorrnets
      also use a proxy
      • bradysdaman, on 05/14/2008, -6/+5how exactly do you use a proxy, please explain
        • troye, on 05/14/2008, -0/+2for bittorent, there are proxies available as bittorrent traffic is just udp with some tcp thrown in on certain ports. Just use a packet forwarding bot (aka proxy)

          for limewire, i don't use it and niether should you. Limewire is too 2001 to be of any use now against RIAA/MPAA
    • urinate, on 05/14/2008, -0/+7A hundred people downloading it isn't even that much.
      • troye, on 05/14/2008, -0/+1true. but if RIAA sues said persons 100 x 3000 (cost of infringement per file) x 30 files = profit
    • nobodynoes, on 05/14/2008, -0/+0you are a gentleman and a scholar h0stile17.
      best reply ever
  • elmuerte17, on 05/14/2008, -0/+14man, Limewire really is a bitch - first you can't find a single track labeled correctly and now this...
  • KaiSe7eN, on 05/14/2008, -3/+18They target colleges they were too stupid to be accepted into. Douchebags.
    • Pfkninenines, on 05/14/2008, -0/+2I wish I could favorite that comment.
  • trumpcard, on 05/14/2008, -9/+1I'm scared. lol
    • matthewjhughes, on 05/14/2008, -0/+3Buried for unnecessary lol. Comment was unfunny.
  • theratdotus, on 05/14/2008, -4/+47WAIT, SO THEY DOWNLOAD MUSIC ILLEGALLY OFF OF YOU, THEN SUE YOU? can you counter sue for them downloading the song illegally off of you? this makes no sense.
    • wedges, on 05/14/2008, -0/+17you can't sue them back because you don't own the copyright. if i own my own material, i am free to do whatever the ***** i want with it, wheras you can't.
    • Zipko, on 05/14/2008, -0/+8They don't care if people are downloading song, they only go after those who are hosting them. Technically (IANAL) I don't think it's even illegal to download music for free, only distribute it without paying royalties. Though file sharing networks discourage leaching, and in situations where you're hosting part of the file for others while the rest is downloading then you're still breaking the law even if you don't continue to offer it after your download finishes.
    • halleyscomet, on 05/14/2008, -1/+14This is the RIAA we're talking about. "Sense" is not a factor.

      Ever now and then record company execs decide they dictate what people listen to, as opposed to responding to market demand. Sales plummet and the record executives get fired, replaced with a new crop.

      The last time this cycle came around, the incompetent, egotistical, out of touch executives pointed their fingers at the Internet and blamed file sharing for the flagging sales. They've continued to keep their careers running by pimping this line, insisting that their crappy artist lineup isn't the problem.

      The RIAA isn't about piracy, it's about providing a cover story so senile executives can keep their overpaid jobs.
      • dreicher, on 05/14/2008, -8/+1Nice try, but your logic doesn't really hold up. Sales and downloading are both a function of demand. So, unless you can show that total demand has, in fact, gone down your theory is completely baseless.

        That's not to say that the *AA's and executives don't suck, but don't go around just parroting arguments because they sound good.
    • mike17032, on 05/14/2008, -1/+5They hold (or represent the people that do) the copyright dumbass, its not a violation for them to download something they own.

      You have no ***** idea how this works do you?
    • junkstore, on 05/14/2008, -0/+3What if I create my own content and use a misleading filename (e.g. that of a popular song), then wait until the RIAA "steals" it from me?
      Can I get them for that?
      • telepheedian, on 05/14/2008, -0/+1Yes, as long as you stated copyright and allowed rights somewhere, whether it be a website, or in the tag itself. You COULD have some fun there....
  • V4nd4L22, on 05/14/2008, -15/+10i dont c ppl still use Limewire when the Torrent network is a lot better
    • bigsteve, on 05/14/2008, -0/+13I didn't know you could comment via SMS...
    • Chassit, on 05/14/2008, -0/+3In English please...
    • Jwoey, on 05/14/2008, -0/+2c isn't a word. neither is ppl.
    • matthewjhughes, on 05/14/2008, -0/+4Stupidity. You have it.
    • lulzy, on 05/14/2008, -1/+2AIDS. You have it.
    • logandurand, on 05/14/2008, -0/+1BItTorrent is a protocol, not a network, but that's beside the point. People still use Gnutella because if you're just looking for one small file, it's quick and efficient.
    • troye, on 05/14/2008, -0/+1lazy typer?

      I don't know. I have used digg on my mobile before. Has anyone here tried to comment via a qwerty keyboard the size of a bagel?
  • Abbeygargoyle, on 05/14/2008, -2/+23This is why you should just use Bittorrent.
    • mike17032, on 05/14/2008, -2/+6Sorry but thats just not practical for finding some stuff. If you want new hot stuff and are looking for the whole album, then ya it works. But older more rare stuff is a lot easier to find on Limewire.
      • troye, on 05/14/2008, -0/+1No, it just depends on what tracker. And you can PM people on dmonoid to ask for stuff. The l337 people have EVERYTHING!
  • akermani, on 05/14/2008, -6/+47obligatory ***** mr babyman statement
  • krewl, on 05/14/2008, -3/+17here is another step by step for the RIAA to follow. type the number eight, type five equal signs, type a capital d, then put it in your mouth.
  • mlbwebdesign, on 05/14/2008, -1/+20Can't catch me, I'm the Gingerbread Man!
  • yunus, on 05/14/2008, -0/+24Why do people use Limeware or Kazaa anymore? How many cases brought by the MPAA/RIAA were from people using bittorrents.
    • astrotrain, on 05/14/2008, -1/+2Easy to setup, easy to use. Plus Limeware is illegally making money by making people think they are legally getting music and movies if they update to the Pro version.
      • ApokalypseNow, on 05/14/2008, -0/+1I use Frostwire - nobody making money from it, and its OSS.
    • scooterbaga, on 05/14/2008, -0/+9shh... Let the suckers jump on the grenade.
    • RealmDown, on 05/14/2008, -0/+3Speaking of whom, how IS ***** nowadays ? Still working on improving e-mail security ?
    • telepheedian, on 05/14/2008, -0/+1I hate to say this, but the average music pirate probably uses limewire, the hardcore types use bittorrent, Joe consumer doesn't understand this thing called security, people have been caught sharing their whole hard drives, including financial data.
    • darlyn, on 05/14/2008, -0/+3Because they are all idiots and think waiting half an hour for a single song justifies an 'easy' setup.That, and because they don't know Bittorrent exists.
      • yunus, on 05/15/2008, -0/+2I am a geek but I really thought bittorrents had become more well known to the average person.
      • rrbest, on 05/15/2008, -0/+1nzb is even better
  • jamer19, on 05/14/2008, -7/+10What is the difference between the RIAA going through your files on YOUR computer to search for copywrited material and the police going through your house without a warrent? The RIAA are a bunch of cowards. The artists arn't making any money off of what the RIAA are doing. Speaking from an song writer/producers point of view, when I release music, I WANT people to download it. I don't mind giving it away. Everybody knows that artists don't make any money off Record sales anyway, they make it off of shows and going on tour. Damn the RIAA and everything they do.
    • slexaxton, on 05/14/2008, -1/+3Your house isnt a publicly shared entity. You have a choice to share or not share your files to the public. Other than that, right on.
    • ileftfark, on 05/14/2008, -2/+7Umm... they are simply looking through files on the network that a person has chosen to share with the world. At least in this particular case.

      Not a fan of the RIAA, but they can't see what you don't upload.

      And what music are you releasing? Most bands still want to be able to make a few bucks off their albums. If you don't mind giving it away, chances are people don't wanna hear it. I like the idea that bands will release online, but you can still donate, pay for a higher bitrate, or pay for liner notes/etc.
      • BoneheadFarker, on 05/14/2008, -0/+8Most bands only make money off of concerts, while the label takes in album sales. There might be a small percentage kicked over to the artist, but it's negligable compared to tours. So by downloading and going to concerts, you're giving your money to the artists and not the middlemen. At one time the middlemen served a purpose by marketing an artist, providing studio time, and handling distribution. Today bands can handle a lot of this by themselves, and the middlemen are trying to justify their existance...
    • SydBarrett420, on 05/14/2008, -1/+8I hear everyone saying it, but who in the hell has their entire MP3 library exposed for download? What ***** sites are you all using to download from? I have never heard of such a thing using torrents.

      IMO if you are stupid enough to use a program targeted by the RIAA then you deserve to be caught. These RIAA guys are so far behind the curve that anyone who gets caught by them has to be a tool.
    • TheFuzzyOne, on 05/14/2008, -1/+6Media Sentry isn't digging through files on your computer. You're offering the contents of your computer to the internet.
    • Ratteler, on 05/14/2008, -0/+6The difference Jammer, is that the Police are a recognized Law enforcement group. They can fall back on a probably cause excuse. The RIAA has ABSOLUTELY NO RIGHT to invade you personal property without you expressed consent. They CANNOT obtain a warrant, because only a recognized law enforcement agency can apply for a warrant? No private citizen can be given a warrant to investigate another.

      The RIAA is not a law enforcement agency making any "evidence" they collect without the consent the of individual in question illegal.
      • MrWhite7, on 05/14/2008, -1/+2Try and stop them... hope the irony isn't lost on you.
        • Ratteler, on 05/14/2008, -0/+1The truth always comes out, and payback is a bitch.

          They will be stopped.
  • danieldantastic, on 05/14/2008, -2/+13Or just don't listen to major-label RIAA crap. Check stuff out online and then buy from small labels and go to shows. Let the big dinosaur labels and their manufactured crap entertainers die out like they should.
    • urinate, on 05/14/2008, -0/+1This is good advice, but don't think that when the small labels become bigger, they're "immune" from temptation.
  • Beatmiser, on 05/14/2008, -0/+16It amazes me how many people I talk to- just average users- who say things to me like 'I just got 'x' off of Limewire. The masses just can't seem to get their heads around bittorrent or usenet.
    • abatch, on 05/14/2008, -0/+7It's because the masses don't want to be bothered with downloading an entire album. They just want to get the crappy hit single that gets played 80 times a day on the radio.
    • robbob, on 05/14/2008, -0/+1Too cheap for usenet
    • elmuerte17, on 05/14/2008, -0/+5bittorrent is too complicated for them... first you gotta download and install the program, then ya gotta find a torrent site, then ya gotta download the torrent, then ya gotta download the files, then ya gotta find the files, then ya gotta put 'em in your music player of choice (wmp for the average limewire user...) i mean, most computer users can't handle more than one step to do anything.
      • darlyn, on 05/14/2008, -0/+1The only hard part about bittorrent is finding the right torrent file. With sites like nowtorrents.com, even that has become easier.
    • lulzy, on 05/14/2008, -0/+2limewire is quicker. you risk getting caught if you are too obvious but you don't have to sift through bad torrents. I use both and unless i have a huge amount of music to download i use Limewire.
    • DeFex, on 05/14/2008, -1/+2Lets hope it stays that way. There has always been a "more convenient way" for the lamers to use. and get most of the publicity and notice from the MAFIAA.
  • McMaster88, on 05/14/2008, -0/+7torrent!
  • dist0rtedwave, on 05/14/2008, -2/+12OMG... how could they use public information to find out who is downloading music illegally? And after that they actually check to make sure it is the actual song, and not some song sharing the name! I for one am outraged.

    Seriously, its not like people are unaware of the risk of downloading illegally, or the increased risk of doing so on a college campus. If you know you are breaking a law, but continue to do so because you feel there is a fairly low risk of getting caught, you have no reason to feel that the consequences if the copyright holders find you are unfair.
    • SydBarrett420, on 05/14/2008, -1/+8Sure, play fair, buy in, and support a format that has been dead for over 10 years. The fact that music industry keeps trying to get everyone to buy outdated technology is enough to stop me from buying something.
      • robbob, on 05/14/2008, -1/+5CDs aren't outdated. In fact, they are superior to a compressed file format.
        • SydBarrett420, on 05/14/2008, -2/+1CD's are outdated, artists such as Bob Weir have stated as such for years.
      • MrWhite7, on 05/14/2008, -2/+3It's always cute when people rationalize theft for themselves.
        • SydBarrett420, on 05/14/2008, -1/+3Read this you ignorant ***** and tell me who is stealing from who? http://www.negativland.com/albini.html So know that we have established that you are not stealing from musicians, but from corporate suits, what is your gripe?
          • MrWhite7, on 05/14/2008, -1/+1...it's even cuter when they make your argument for you.
    • Ratteler, on 05/14/2008, -0/+6Because it's not public information if it's obtained through a Peer to Peer communication. Then it's a privileged and private conversation between 2 people, and neither of their testimonies is admissible as evidence in a court of law. It's as if I called you, and recorded you admitting that you are committing treason against the people of the United States by supporting the RIAA's terrorist tactics against the People of this nations. No matter how much of a backstabbing liar you sound like on tape, and no matter how damning the evidence is that you knew what you were doing was dead wrong, I still couldn't using it any court to convict you anything. Because without informing you I'm recording our conversation first, it's inadmissible.

      Of course.... when the law no longer represent everyone equally, there is no need for LAW when dealing with traitors.
      • dist0rtedwave, on 05/14/2008, -1/+2If you say that you had might as way sell every single web page is private. There are only two parties involved in a http request, but to my knowledge web pages are considered public. If you open up a port, and allow anyone to connect to it and receive some information, that information is public. Its more like wearing a T-Shirt with evidence that you are committing treason taped to it, and walking around in public view. Anyone who wants can look at it.

        Who exactly is the law being unfair to here? Do you believe people should have rights to post a file that can be downloaded by anyone except for certain authorities?
        • Ratteler, on 05/14/2008, -0/+1There is no perceived privacy on a web page. There is no attempt in most cases to keep the information presented private. However, hacking some ones website and stealing information that is not linked to is illegal.

          "Unauthorized access" entails approaching, trespassing within, communicating with, storing data in, retrieving data from, or otherwise intercepting and changing computer resources without consent. These laws relate to either or both, or any other actions that interfere with computers, systems, programs or networks.

          http://www.ncsl.org/programs/lis/CIP/hacklaw.htm

          The fact is, in EVERY RIAA/MPAA case, there was no "authority" involved in obtaining the evidence.

          The very nature of a P2P communication makes it private and subject to current wiretapping laws. Which in the USA, means the only way evidence can be obtained is by first obtaining a warrant, and then having a member of a law enforcement agency execute that warrant.

          Other wise, I can just hunt you down and find something illegal you did. Without any Due Process.
  • robthom, on 05/14/2008, -0/+4Yeah for the money driven art gestapo.
  • pigfister, on 05/14/2008, -6/+10Boycott anti consumer *****.

    The BPI Are: SONY, UNIVERSAL, WARNER GROUP, EMI.

    The RIAA Soundexchange Are: SONY, UNIVERSAL, WARNER GROUP, EMI.

    The IFPI Are: The same anti consumer lot as listed above!

    The MPAA Are: SONY, UNIVERSAL, WARNER GROUP, DISNEY, PARAMOUNT, FOX.
    • ibeetle, on 05/14/2008, -3/+4You just think about your little boycott while all your friends are lining up to see the new Indiana Jones movie, or watching Battlestar Galatica, or Heroes.
      • Chassit, on 05/14/2008, -1/+5I will be as I download them for free!
      • Aensland, on 05/14/2008, -1/+2...which most of them probably just downloaded...
  • wukillabee, on 05/14/2008, -5/+10usenet/pirvate sites/ftp/dc++/irc ftw

    p2p ftl
  • MysticMist, on 05/14/2008, -1/+2How do we know the RIAA isn't doing this itself?
  • lead2thehead, on 05/14/2008, -2/+7I don't understand how this could possibly hold up in court. IP addresses can be spoofed, wireless networks can be used without the owner's knowledge, and I seriously doubt that the RIAA's stupid hacker scripts are admissible as evidence.
    • shark72, on 05/14/2008, -0/+4Sorry to hear that you don't understand. Keep reading the articles and it'll be more clear. This excellent blog is written by a lawyer who defends file sharers:

      http://recordingindustryvspeople.blogspot.com/

      His blog often posts court transcripts. They're dry and wordy, but reading a few will help you get a better understanding.
    • astrotrain, on 05/14/2008, -0/+3Yes we know the RIAA as the PITA....but they are a corporation, and here in the States, the Law listens to corporations, and will believe the corporation over any internet user any day of the week.
      • lead2thehead, on 05/14/2008, -0/+0That's not true. People are constantly suing corporations for obnoxious amounts of money over asinine things and winning.
    • Narrwald, on 05/14/2008, -2/+1 Some woman tried this last summer / fall. She lost. (As anyone who takes the RIAA to court; if you are caught by them for providing music online, you ARE breaking the law. Even if we don't think it should be against the law, it is, and you're best off settling out of court before the real fines can be dealt.)
  • irishjays, on 05/14/2008, -1/+11if you get caught all you have to do is call for Parlei
  • SydBarrett420, on 05/14/2008, -0/+8Perhaps the RIAA should focus on concert attendance, I know personally since the advent of downloading the amount of shows I go to yearly has increased ten fold.

    Downloading may take away from record sales, but without it I guarantee that many bands would see their popularity and exposure decrease dramatically.
    • SailingAlien, on 05/14/2008, -0/+6The RIAA doesn't make money from the concert tour. The band does. So if you go to more concerts you are helping out the people who really matter - the musicians. Let them know.
    • DeFex, on 05/14/2008, -0/+2they dont like it because the band gets paid most of the money for their work. while RIAA members give 2% or so.
    • urinate, on 05/14/2008, -0/+2What was that? Share money with the artists? Are you ***** crazy?
  • bioflux, on 05/14/2008, -3/+7People still use LimeWire? I thought it had died off years ago.
  • Phillycat81, on 05/14/2008, -4/+19I'm surprised people still use limewire.

    Thats like people still using vhs.
  • digitallysick, on 05/14/2008, -2/+10So what have we learned? Limewire/kazaa is for n00bs and they are only after extremely mainstream music. I guess thats why they end up busting soccer moms.
    • mike17032, on 05/14/2008, -3/+3Yes yew we all know most of you diggiots have a boner for Torrents, we get it.

      The fact is Limewire has a much larger selection of stuff on it for music, so it still has its uses. If you want a whole album, Torrents are the way to go. But just a few songs from an artist (that you can usually get inside of 10 seconds instead of waiting overnight for a torrent to finish) there is nothing wrong with LW if you know how to protect yourself (aka dont share anything).
      • digitallysick, on 05/14/2008, -1/+1Well i don't know what torrent client you use, but i download whole albums quicker than i can just 1 song most of the time
  • Jalh, on 05/14/2008, -9/+4where is the '***** The RIAA" ???
    • enigmaneo, on 05/14/2008, -1/+1It was the first comment.
    • potterboy, on 05/14/2008, -0/+4Go North, 'till you can't no more, and ye shall find what ye seek.
  • aserer511, on 05/14/2008, -0/+12I've done ~80GB of combined up/down of torrents at school this past year, and can't wait to rinse and repeat next year!
    • sentinel106, on 05/14/2008, -1/+5I salute you sir!
    • Pfkninenines, on 05/14/2008, -0/+5How'd you get around your school's systems? I mean, 80GB usually doesn't go unnoticed...Unless you are the person who controls that stuff.
  • rockgoddess99x, on 05/14/2008, -0/+1http://digg.com/music/Does_She_Look_Like_a_Music_P ...

    This is a link to an article in BusinessWeek about a woman who was sent one of the "prelitigation settlement letters" for downloading music illegally and how she has been fighting back against the unscrupulous tactics of the RIAA. Well worth taking a look at.
  • MysticalYute, on 05/14/2008, -2/+3use google people, its the easiest way to find mp3. emusic.com is giving away 100 drm free songs on trial signup. Make use of what you got and dont use p2p programs.
  • calipan, on 05/14/2008, -0/+3So if the RIAA is using Limewire and just recording IPs that attempt to download the music files aren't they sharing the music files?!?!? Am I missing something here? How can they sue you for copyright infringement when they, by their own admittance, are sharing the files in order to catch people attempting to steal it.
    • elmuerte17, on 05/14/2008, -0/+1yeah, i kinda thought their whole plan was busting people for "making available" not for actually downloading the crap. nice double standard, isn't entrapment illegal?
    • stealthalbino, on 05/14/2008, -0/+1We'll see how well it holds up in court once the defense attorney brings up that little bit on entrapment.
  • malcolmlo, on 05/14/2008, -1/+8"We have no capability of targeting any school at all," said the RIAA representative, who argued that there is a large "misperception" among university administrators that individual colleges are being picked on. "Technically we can't do it. We find what we find with this process, and that's what we send to schools."

    Bold-faced LIE. What a crock of *****. Ever heard of reverse DNS lookup? I could log onto limewire right now, look up someone who is sharing madonna's new song, find their IP, do a reverse DNS lookup and tell you which school they are at. Its easy, and could EASILY be scripted.
    • demigod, on 05/14/2008, -0/+2actually, probably not. unless its a mail server on that ip, there is 0 need to have rdns on it. but, you could get the ip and do a look up in the arin db and find out who that ip is swiped to.
    • iadiggs10, on 05/14/2008, -0/+1You don't even necessarily have to have the computer looking up DNS info. Most schools (including mine) are allocated a block of IP addresses. All the RIAA would have to do is look at letters they have sent to XYZ school and make a rough determination of that school's IP address block and then ask their computer programs to make anything in that block the highest priority.
  • Ratteler, on 05/14/2008, -2/+6And yet NO ONE has brought forth the fact that this blatantly against wiretapping laws?
    Neither the RIAA, nor MediaSentry are law enforcement agencies. They have absolutely legal NO right to reveal anything that takes place in a private conversation. That is what a PEER TO PEER connection is. It's like picking up a telephone and calling someone based on their IP address, instead of their phone number.

    There are lots of weak points in the security of a phone conversation. Wiring in your house, on the street outside your house, if your using a cordless phone the conversation can be plucked right out of the air. The central office can easily by tapped by any group with a legitimate warrant.

    The fact is... without that warrant, and without an actual designated law enforcement individual running that equipment, NOTHING from a phone conversation can be submitted to any court in the U.S.A.

    In fact, revealing any private information received from a phone conversation opens up the person who revealed that information to criminal charges in most states, not the people in the conversation.

    This is such a strict rule that even if I call you and admit a crime, unless you TELL me you're recording me, it's not admissible in court.

    Yet the RIAA is getting away with submitting information obtained illegally because it's over a different network?
    • Coolspot420, on 05/14/2008, -4/+5Bawwwwwwwww wiretapping bawwwwwww RIAA.

      What the RIAA does is perfectly legal, they search for copyrighted music being shared, and they notify the ISP that you are probably breaking the law.

      Using your IP phone example, what the RIAA is doing is looking through the phone book for someone advertising that they have weed to sell then telling the cops about it.
      • vipertech, on 05/14/2008, -0/+2Advertising is not an admission of guilt. You have to prove that a sale has been made. In this case a "handshake" does not signify a transfer has been made, only that a connection was established. It is up to the party making the claim to provide the evidence that a copyright infringement (or actual transfer) has occurred. If they ask to see the contents of your HD, you are protected under the 5th amendment.
        • Coolspot420, on 05/15/2008, -1/+1You know what, you don't have to get a blowjob from an undercover cop for them to bust you for prostitution.

          As for the 5th Amendment nonsense, your harddrive is like your house; if you have evidence of illegal activity, the police can and will get a warrant and search for it. As for the RIAA, they don't need a search warrant, because you are freely allowing them see what you have just by sharing it in your P2P client.
        • vipertech, on 05/15/2008, -0/+0In civil cases it is up to the party making the claim of wrongdoing to provide the evidence that the wrongdoing has taken place.

          When you have files in a shared folder and people can see those files, it just establishes that you have files on your computer named a certain way. It does not establish what the actual content of the files are. In order to verify that the file content actually contains said copyrighted material you must download a copy. Once again, a "handshake" only establishes that a connection has been made, not that a transfer has taken place.

          If you want more info go look up how TCP/IP works.
      • Ratteler, on 05/14/2008, -0/+2"Using your IP phone example, what the RIAA is doing is looking through the phone book for someone advertising that they have weed to sell then telling the cops about it."

        No, it's more like going around asking people if they have weed to sell, and blackmailing them with calling the cops instead of actually doing it. Then taking them to court without verifying that they ever had any weed in the first place.

        The "cops" are never involved there by denying the defendant due process. You're not suggesting that anyone should be able to violate the privacy of whoever they choose?
        • Coolspot420, on 05/15/2008, -1/+1I'm suggesting that if you share files illegally on the internet, and offer them to others to download, that you have given up your own privacy.

          If you never want to have to deal with this whole mess, its pretty simple:

          1. Do not download copyrighted music/movies/games illegally
          2. Do not share copyrighted music/movies/games illegally.
        • vipertech, on 05/15/2008, -0/+1The fact that the files are in a "shared folder" does not mean you are giving them away. It's like an open box of candy bars at the gas station, just because they are available to steal does not mean someone has stolen one. The party making the claim that something has been stolen must prove that something has been stolen.
        • Ratteler, on 05/15/2008, -0/+1I'm suggesting that the RIAA/MPAA is not the author/inventor/artist, and that NO where in the Constitution does it suggest that the right to earn a profit for a limited time is transferable. Therefor, they have no legal claim to the Copyright above an beyond that of any citizen.

          Since We The People are all the original owners of ALL intellectual property, (If We the People didn't own it before even the creator, than how could WE grant them a right to profit from it?) it can't be illegal for us share it. It's like renting your car to someone and driving it when they aren't.

          There is no illegality in sharing the files.
  • zulunut, on 05/14/2008, -2/+3haven't you guys heard of the TOR PROJECT?
    Time to move on..

    It's fairly easy to catch a p2p / seeder IP. If ur'e in USA ure *****.. just whois the IP and Arin will tell you the isp..
    Isp has logs of the user + IP.. and blah blah so USA users you are *****... Other places in the world - you are all alright cuz ISP's don't give a flying ***** about the law. Hah! the american dream! Proud to be an American that left USA :)
    • lulzy, on 05/14/2008, -0/+7I left USA and now sound moer dumb then befor
  • Vash3001, on 05/14/2008, -1/+4Who still uses limewire?
  • hydroplane, on 05/14/2008, -0/+3Good to know that so many resources are devoted to ensuring Soulja Boy receives royalties.
  • mrsteveman1, on 05/14/2008, -0/+4""We have no capability of targeting any school at all," said the RIAA representative, who argued that there is a large "misperception" among university administrators that individual colleges are being picked on. "Technically we can't do it. We find what we find with this process, and that's what we send to schools.""

    Yes they can, that automated script can easily check the IP against the range assigned to the university and drop IPs for specific schools.
  • mvk25, on 05/14/2008, -0/+3File sharing is going to continue whether they like it or not.
  • stix213, on 05/14/2008, -0/+2Yeah I was pretty sure that the RIAA still doesn't understand how pirating has changed over the last 5 years. Using Limewire? And their technique for catching people doesn't catch anyone who is downloading, only uploading.

    This seems strange that the RIAA doesn't understand how to combat torrents yet, or even people using limewire that disable uploads. Who still downloads one song at a time on limewire when you can get the entire album on TPB in less time?

    I'd like to say that the pirates are just staying one step ahead of the RIAA, but it sounds like the RIAA has stopped even trying to keep up.
  • l815, on 05/14/2008, -0/+1Who still uses Limwire? Emule + Torrents all the way!
  • relinquish, on 05/14/2008, -0/+2And all of this is now becoming avoidable. Enter the Owner-Free Filesystem. All files that are shared are literally random representations of the target files, and each target file is comprised of multiple random "blocks". Thus, every block alone can be considered useless unless given a specific instruction on how to assemble the block into a "useful" target file. Also, an interesting side effect of this is the fact that blocks can be re-used to store different inserts, so you could technically use the same blocks used to store a Madonna album that you used to store your Orson Welles collection. Organizations which try to hamper the capabilities of such technology will not last for long.

    For more info see: http://wiki.offdev.org and http://offsystem.sourceforge.net/en_technology.htm ...

    Note: For those who try to refute the technology by saying that the blocks still constitute as derivative works, I remind you that the blocks do NOT bear a one to one relationship with the file/s being represented, and are in every sense of the word, random. The technology can be explained in this overly simplified example: If Acme Inc. claimed copyright to the number 8, they still could not copyright every representation (2+6, 4*2, 2+2+4, 16/2, etc).
  • nickweston, on 05/14/2008, -4/+6Ignorant people....I'm in the music and I'm pro-choice. If I spend a year working on something and don't want to give it away, it's MY intellectual property (what if people were doing this with BOOKS?). If I'm some Indie band and think it's better to give it away for promo, fine. I just want the choice.
    And to all you delusional psychos who think that this theft/stealing/piracy is ok, I have some phone numbers for you. For some reason, people think music is not a product, like a car. Sure, I think BMWs cost too much, but that doesn't mean the alternative is to go STEAL one!
    I may not agree with the RIAA's tactics, but I COMPLETELY disagree with people who think they have some "right" to steal music.
    I'd love to see somebody solve this incredibly ridiculous scenario. Give me some pirate's addresses, then I can go steal something back to make it even...pirates=scum
    • aj3289, on 05/14/2008, -0/+3too bad you're the only one who thinks that way :)
    • ADIDAS247, on 05/14/2008, -0/+3"what if people were doing this with BOOKS"
      They do, it's called a library. You take the book out, read it till its finished. You maybe might even go see it if it's made into a movie. With music, you download it, listen to it, maybe go see the concert.
      • mzx639, on 05/14/2008, -0/+3People also download ebooks. The library is a good example, but the books are paid for, usually by tax dollars, and then shared by 'checking out'. But many people also borrow digital media such as CD's and DVD's from the library and copy them. A good argument might be, if your tax dollars paid for the books, CD's DVD's, don't you partially own it? And if you do partially own it, why couldn't you be allowed to copy it legally?
    • PoSSeSSeDCoW, on 05/14/2008, -0/+1The people who think that it should be legal to steal someone's IP are incredibly deluded. It's like they feel a rampant need to justify their illicit actions.
  • aj3289, on 05/14/2008, -0/+3"...turned up more than a hundred users trading various copies of the song."

    Nooo. Their approach found 100 users? Wow. They're REALLY bright... what about the millions of others? Didn't find them!?
    • Pfkninenines, on 05/14/2008, -0/+1Considering it was Madonna, I doubt millions of people would show up.
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 62 of 62 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.