They will skip the notice via proxy (your ISP passing a notice to you without identifying you to the claimant) and go straight to court to have the ISP forced to provide the ID of the subscriber for a specific IP observed to be active torrenting copyrighted materials.
Then they’ll attempt to recover those court costs from that subscriber as well as sue them for the original copyright infringement.
I think they’ll have quite an uphill battle with that approach, particularly when trying to prove the subscriber to an internet connection is also responsible for, let alone aware of, the alleged infringement. If it was that easy, they wouldn’t have bothered with notices to begin with.
Yeah this happened during the Napster era and it was so incredibly unpopular and unsympathetic with the general public that it didn’t continue after a while. Suing a single mom on food stamps for thousands of dollars because her teenage son downloaded a game one time is a truly abominable look for a company.
I feel like most people including producers don’t care so much, they care more about promoting more people to get into the whole creatives sector so to speak so that there’s less concentrated loss of capital and risk for everyone involved including the pirates and “copyright enforcers”
I watched a thing about copyright and trademark enforcement where the corporate organization was somehow able to gather a team of 50 police at tax payer expense and march them into a Sunday market in order to capture and shut down market stores selling fake knockoffs. You could see how wildly unpopular it was with the entire crowd around them where some shoppers even continued browsing and trying to purchase goods from the shut down stores even with cops standing right there trying to make the crowd move on.
Copyright and trademark infringement against multi-billionare companies with continuous record profits is seen as a victimless “crime” at best by the vast majority of people, even reasonably well off people too. The only repercussion if you’re “caught” should be just paying the actual construction/reproduction cost of the item which is pennies, they weren’t going to make this sale at their ridiculous retail price in the first place and their real losses are miniscule at best.
that is the case in Australia, courts ruled only actual loss can be pursued (cost of a DVD basically) which made it uneconomical for IP holders to sue individuals. they still messa round the edges and tried to get the government to ban access to pirate sites (easy to bypass)
imagine if they spent half as much time going after abusers or billionaire tax cheats as they do people who download game of thrones from seven years ago.
We really need to push for the use of i2p for torrenting. Given that the the offer of VPNs with port forwarding that are decent is little and decreasing every year.
The music industry welcomed the development, stating that a service that helps infringers evade prosecution through anonymization also acts illegally.
But a service that artificially inflates revenues with shady accounting of song plays while simultaneously withholding payments toward creators, that’s totally not criminal.
-Also the music industry
Copyright laws based in the eighteenth century sure are awesome when applying analog scarcity to the digital world! /s
I’m for publishers and other representatives of the old system pulling away from the digital world close to entirely. Their whole business model requires scarcity that used to exist when creators were on the other side of the world and fans were lucky to have them come within 200 miles for a chance to enjoy them, and in the meantime, want to buy a record to experience them at home.
Now, creators can be in our hands, on our desks, and easily in our living rooms. The middlemen that brought those scarce physical objects to us (records, tapes, vhs and audio, books, etc) aren’t needed anymore, because the distribution of the art or idea is instant and on demand and already paid for by the communications package we all subscribe to.
Fans can connect directly with creators, who no longer need millions of fans to give them a huge slice of overall music (or other creative work) revenue. Just a few hundred devoted fans is enough to live comfortably, instead of being a superstar.
I’m dreaming, though…
ETA: the publishers could rethink their role and evolve to help creatives reach their audience, but, currently, they impede that. Creatives do better (per fan) when they know their fans and can connect directly with them.
At this point its pretty much a moral transgression to buy music from any labels, organizations, or groups filing these lawsuits. If no one bought their music, they’d have to join a mock trial team or debate club and we might finally be able to straighten out the mess that is copyright law. :-D
Cloudflare should discontinue service to music streaming companies or music industry sites. Let the music industry go to war with the internet at large and see how this plays out for them.
Like the Bahnhof ISP in Sweden. They were ordered by a court order from Elsevier (the academic journal extortion firm) to block sci-hub, so they blocked sci-hub and Elsevier journals.
CDN services certainly but not DNS, we’re all profitting from Cloudflare & Co having fully automated DNS because that is the sole fact currently holding back court ordered DNS blocks on a large scale.
The DNS Providers do not discriminate and that fact guarantees them (largely) not being forced to discriminate. Not interfering with anyone’s DNS is the most Cloudflare can do for the piracy community because it ensures Publishers can’t just send an angry email to get a DNS block
Most Publishers in any Industry are a cancer on society. Cramming DRM in where they can while scalping both customers and creators whilst gaslighting both into believing continuing to shovel money to their overpriced services is in their best interest.
I say most because if there is even a single one doing what they are supposed to do then saying “all” would be wrong and I am aware of at least one offering drm free ebooks (unless you consider an embedded username in the epub file drm) at reasonable prices while (as far as I am aware) not fucking over the authors
The worst development of all has been the „buy but dont own“ model. If I buy anything, I own it. It’s symple, reliable and permanent. Obviously, if I own something, I can sell it. If someone owns a video game, music or a movie, they can sell it. This perverted idea of being able to tell a customer what to do with their bought stuff needs to go.
Man, that’d be horrible! Imagine people could exercise their rights. Thank God we live in a world of zero digital ownership with anti DRM circumvention laws to strip everyone from rights copyright laws are supposed to grant. We can sue anyone that scans books and lends them out 1:1 as that’s untransformative and unfair use. But hey, it’s a free market! Let’s offer them e-books with DRM for $15 that libraries can only lend out 15 times, 20 hours total read time or three months after purchase, whichever comes first, and then jack up the price to $30 when they’re locked into the ecosystem. Sounds like a fair deal to me! Not like they have an alternative.
Tor is an implementation of i2p. Basically it’s a new protocol that obfuscates everything end to end.
On public trackers you’d be fine since it’s public and ip doesn’t matter. But on private trackers, they usually need your ip to track your activity on the tracker, but with i2p it would be nigh impossible to do so.
I’ve thought about this and wouldn’t it be way more private (and realistically secure given changing IPS) to just use a cryptographical key each login? Like everywhere else on the web?
Tor is not a implementation of I2P. They are 2 different technologies with different usecases.
Tor ussage nodes and hops to obfuscate trafics origin while I2P obfuscates the entire network layer. With I2P every nodes IP is know to every node. Wile this is not the case for tor. Thirth hop doesnt know the IP of the first hop.
Also tor is heavily used to access the clearnet while I2P is not designed with clearnet in mind.
You still got it half wrong. I2P hops don’t know each other. The big difference is I2P tries to make every user a relay while only Tor relays are relays. Hence Tor torrenting is not recommended because it overloads the limited relays, I2P torrenting is fine because you expand the pool of relays at the same time. I2P doesn’t really have exit nodes, too, so it’s a separate network from the internet.
I never said the hops are know on I2P. All the nodes are though because it is a P2P network. Perhaps some bad wording on my part. But yeah your are right
torrentfreak.com
Oldest