Hard News: The song is not the same
314 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 … 3 4 5 6 7 … 13 Newer→ Last
-
If I can harvest ip addresses of people sharing copyright material its not going to be too hard for anyone else to is it.
But without downloading the file, you can't be certain that it's actually infringing. A name proves nothing. I could record some traffic noise and call it "Chasing Cars", and share it, and that'd be legal. I could even make it the same length as the song of the same name by Snow Patrol. Totally legit, but without downloading it you don't know what it is. So you're back to where you started, which is that you don't know, and don't want to know, what the limitations of wholesale traffic filtering actually are. And I'm not going to bother wasting the electrons trying to explain to someone who actively ignores what they're being told.
-
And I'm not going to bother wasting the electrons trying to explain to someone who actively ignores what they're being told.
well true, you are wasting "electrons" cos you're 'telling' me without any grounding, or proof of your argument. what's you're experience in isp level data analysis again, or in the use of bit torrent or anything that allows you to say something with such authority?
I've clearly demonstrated that I can find details about who is sharing files that are labeled 'xxxx.avi'
sure we don't know that they are xxxx.avi, so download the fucker, everyone's doing it, its not hard. if it turns out to be xxxx.avi and you logged their ip address as sharing xxxx.avi then you've got a hit haven't you. that's pretty damn simple isn't it and it hasn't even required you to inspect packets or anything else that having access at isp level might allow you to do.Vuse gives you all kinds of info. a regular human wrote that program, I'm guessing with some nice cold hard movie industry spare change they could find a programmer who could write a program to analyze anything the wanted to, even if it required them to download the odd gig or 5000.
So hold off on the you're so dumb I'm so smart angle and lay down the cold hard facts in writing. if you are a programmer working at the required level the explain using examples your argument, if not, then concede to the valid points made. if you haven't got vuse, download it, its free and load in a torrent and have a look at the info available in the program. its pretty interesting.
-
They aren't valid points.
When you are using a program yourself, you are self-selecting. You go out looking for a particular file, and use that as your basis point to find more information about files with the same name/profile.
What you're asking is that ISPs should do this for all their traffic. How long did it take you to find out about 1 track? Multiply that by the millions of files being shared daily over an ISP's links. And there is no automated way of ascertaining whether a file is copyrighted or not, or whether the creator of it cares whether it is shared, whether it is being shared legally through a contracted arrangement. All these things need people to do research - lots of people. And all ISPs will have to do this.
Your mate who downloaded the AVI that started playing before it had finished loading had to download enough packets to make that possible - probably around a few hundred kilobytes, maybe even a meg. The packets we're talking about are a fraction of that size. They vary, depending on the transmission method (http, ftp, or proprietary protocols, VPNs etc all have their own standards). BitTorrent doesn't change this, it merely changes where your system finds them, wraps a little more info around them so that the packets can be downloaded out of order and then reassembled into a copy of the original file. Some files won't be usable until all the packets are assembled, especially material that's been compressed. Some files won't work at all because a vital packet is missing or has been corrupted in transmission. Just because it happened with one file doesn't mean you can extend the example across the entirety of the net.
A programmer can write a program that would find all instances of a particular file name. Wouldn't be hard, it could roam the net autonomously and send reports back of the existence of such files. BUT to verify that the file is indeed being shared illegally, the ISP would have to download it themselves (thus breaking the copyright if it exists), run it (to ensure it wasn't a case of fair use and that the material did in fact infringe) and then block it from their network. And they would have to do this for every file that fits the profile. Pretty soon the percentage of traffic purely related to examining potentially illegal files would rise to be a significant proportion of total traffic, slowing and even blocking the delivery of legitimate information.
You've demanded in the past that I have to accept what you and Simon say about the music business because of your experience. It works both ways. I first wrote a computer program in the 70's at school, bought my first comp in '85, have been working in the industry since '89, and specifically in the internet industry since '96. I've been a councillor of the Internet Society, I've run the Government Information Managers Forum, I've been the IT manager for a Government Ministry and I've worked in the area of e-government since 2000. I know how this stuff works and, to be candid, your posts show that you don't. So you're just going to have to accept that your idea is not feasible, technically or economically.
-
So you're just going to have to accept that your idea is not feasible, technically or economically.
firstly not my idea,
secondly, you seem to think success for media content owners is 100% ceasation of all traffic of pirated material. do you see traffic cops pulling over ever single instance of speed violation?
its not the point, the point is to put in a deterrent where at present there is none.
It is completely feasible to find instances of copyright violation right now, and with access to IP records track and 'warn'.
ip records would also show who's a high volume user.
all that is 'feasible'. Yes?Just because it happened with one file doesn't mean you can extend the example across the entirety of the net.
did I say that? I noted it as an example and I also noted compressed files need all parts, so for someone who 'doesn't know about this stuff' I pretty much said what you said but I said it first.
why don't you outline just for interest and arguments sake what you with your superior knowledge think would happen in the event of access being granted at ip level? what advantages might that get for media owners?
you seem to be inferring none,also, thanks for your backgrounder too, even with that I've never heard of you, but I have heard of simon grigg. he used to run dance parties or something.
-
why don't you outline just for interest and arguments sake what you with your superior knowledge think would happen in the event of access being granted at ip level? what advantages might that get for media owners? you seem to be inferring none,
I can't answer your question because it doesn't make sense. What do you mean by "access being granted at ip level"?
Oh, by the way, I don't give a rat's arse that someone who doesn't post under his own name has heard of me or not. Though it does give you an advantage in claiming experience and knowledge that I can't verify.
-
if internet providers are forced to be involved in tracking pirated material, how do you see that playing out.
What could be done based on what we (you) know.what are the advantages.I'll start.
- usage meters.and.....
.....if you really didn't give a rats arse you wouldn't have even commented on it.....Why would I use my full name? its the internet, full of freaks. you have had experience on the internet haven't you? scary angry dudes like you hang out there.
-
And they would have to do this for every file that fits the profile.
obviously you're a good law abiding citizen who doesn't hang out at bit torrent sites but the reality is that most movies are ripped by a handful of 'scene' people who tag their name on the file, axxo, fxg etc,
as opposed to thousands of rips of the each movie there are really only a few that are shared massively.
go to a torrent search site and type in any recent movie. its multiple instances of the same file.
identifying those files which would be 90% of movie piracy would be a relatively small part of the work. getting the other 10% would be massive. applying it to music, even worse. -
if internet providers are forced to be involved in tracking pirated material, how do you see that playing out.
I see large ISPs taking the most cost-effective route and blocking all torrented material whether it infringes or not. I see many people knocked off the net by being falsely accused of misusing copyrighted materials. I see the genuine serial infringers getting more and more complex systems for distributing their items. I see the 'industry bodies' getting more and more raucous in their claims of livelihods being destroyed. And I see no diminution of copyright infringement.
I see no advantages to the end-user as the net becomes progressively less useful. I see an ever increasing 'arms race' for ISPs as they try hopelessly to keep up with the concerns of the "industry bodies". I see it being more difficult for genuine artists trying to get there material out there to do that independently. I see no advantages for anyone. Copyright infringement is not a technical problem, it can't be solved by throwing technology at it.
usage meters
WTF? How are usage meters going to solve anything? We already have usage meters on our internet accounts - it's how ISPs base their billing and know when you've got to your limit for downloading. The measure the amount of data. I can't even imagine how you might think they could assist in preventing copyright infringement,
and...
scary angry dudes like you hang out there.
And loud-mouthed trolls like you.
-
Pig-wrestling again I see, Mark. :)
-
WTF? How are usage meters going to solve anything?
its not going to solve anything.
its going to give a first indication of biggest downloaders be they of pirated material or legitimate. why would you say wtf to that. its obvious. -
what's you're experience in isp level data analysis again, or in the use of bit torrent or anything that allows you to say something with such authority?
Ohhh, let's see. Coming up on 10 years working in IT, eight of them in network engineering roles or related, including at major ISPs. Currently I work for a large university as a system administrator/network engineer, and have just completed an information systems degree with a network and security focus.
Unlike you, my history is quite readily established through Google. This is my real name. I'm known within the NZ network operators' community. There are plenty of posts archived on NZNOG that demonstrate that I am at least passingly familiar with the topics under discussion. Hell, ask Russell. We've been crossing paths online for over a decade.
a programmer who could write a program to analyze anything the wanted to, even if it required them to download the odd gig or 5000.
The arrogance of that statement is breathtaking. "I don't care how hard it is, I know that it's possible so it must be done!" You're right that it's possible, but you also don't give a flying fuck about the complexities or costs. Costs that would not be borne by your industry, as they never are. They're always dumped on the ISPs, who pass the costs on to their customers, with any notional benefit accruing to neither them or their customers. Fuck that! If you want this shit done, you can damn well pay for it.
-
I see
thanks for that mark. that's the most directly you've put across any point.
Sadly you may be right on some of that.
now. pretend you're not a champion for user rights and using some of that programmer knowledge you were spouting on about put yourself in the chase seat. Knowing what you say you know about the way things work in little black boxes tell us how you can see modern technology being used efficiently to grab pirated material and how you might do it to avoid grabbing legitimate users.And I see no diminution of copyright infringement.
that's just complete bollock. you see NO reduction at all? really, by your vision of the dark future everyone is kicked off the net. you think that would have NO effect? zero effect?
come on, purely by the fact it would cripple normal traffic routes the amount of pirating it would kill along with legit traffic is not zero.And loud-mouthed trolls like you.
it would do wonders for the image of the net nerd if they avoided using mythical names for things, not offering any alternatives, just pointing it out. The loud-mouth bit I'm completely comfortable with.
-
I first wrote a computer program in the 70's at school, bought my first comp in '85, have been working in the industry since '89, and specifically in the internet industry since '96. I've been a councillor of the Internet Society, I've run the Government Information Managers Forum, I've been the IT manager for a Government Ministry and I've worked in the area of e-government since 2000. I know how this stuff works and, to be candid, your posts show that you don't.
Come now, Mark, how does that possibly qualify you? I mean, really. Be reasonable. You're not an end-user with gut instincts, so you obviously don't have the foggiest bloody idea what you're on about.
</sarcasm type="heavy">So you're just going to have to accept that your idea is not feasible, technically or economically.
Actually it is technically possible, for values of possible that equal "costs greater than the GNP of a medium-sized, non-bankrupt African nation". If the entire global music industry were to throw their combined net profits for the last financial year at the problem, it'd be resolved in a matter of months. All of the parts are out there right now, it's the cobbling them together that'll cost obscene sums of money, mostly the coding to track, store and hash all the multi-part streams. Dealing with the encryption that's just starting be deployed could be a problem, though.
-
Knowing what you say you know about the way things work in little black boxes tell us how you can see modern technology being used efficiently to grab pirated material and how you might do it to avoid grabbing legitimate users.
Mark and I have both already answered that question. It's not possible. Whether or not you want to hear it, that's what we're telling you. The technology exists, yes, but not in the form required. The costs to make it deployable in such a fashion are astronomical. If "the media industry" wants it to happen, they can pay for it.
-
would not be borne by your industry
I already said I think it will be the film industry that will drive this. not my industry and I'm not part of my industry, I work outside it, this is nothing to do with me, I simple an interested observer intrigued by seeing this play out. I actually enjoy putting myself on either side of the fence and seeing the view. There's nothing I can do to change it so its purely and observation sport for me.
You're right that it's possible,
That's big of you to admit it,
but you also don't give a flying fuck about the complexities or costs.
yes, that's correct cos I'm discussing possibilities not actualities. I'm interested extrapolating what might happen, looking at it from all sides. it hasn't happened yet, who knows how it will go, but, it is interesting,
Fuck that! If you want this shit done, you can damn well pay for it.
haha, shit man, if I'd known talking about this was going to make you blow a vein..... I still would have done it.
Where have I said I want it done? about a year go I said I think that's whats going to happen, and then when its seemed likely it was I've attempted to envisage how its going to go down.
Nowhere have I said I think it should happen or its what I want to happen, I've put myself in media owners shoes and said if I was them that's what I'd do, but I'm not them, and I have no power over any of this, I'm an observer, and its quite fascinating to see it play out.and for the record I did my uni papers on programming and have worked with computers for over 20 years, most of my work happens on them and the net, why do you think I'm here talking to you guys. I have a laptop sewn to my right hand FFS. I use technology extensively but manage to get out of the studio occasionally too.
no I'm not a sys admin dude, but not the Luddite you might like to imagine, so its ok to get off the high horse now. I didn't pick it up from your brief history but was there any experience in there of working at isp level? I'd love to hear a calm and reasoned response from someone who works for xtra, clearnet, slingshot, xnet, etc, unless of course thats you or mark in which case do lay it out for us.
I'm interested in how this will play out, I've given my opinion and I guess time will tell. In the mean time Matthew, keep a handle on that blood pressure level, its simply not good for you.
-
If "the media industry" wants it to happen, they can pay for it.
I imagine they will but you can't blame em for trying to plam it off onto someone else first.
It's not possible.
I've identified 2 things that are possible which you both failed to mention.
data usage.
yes there are exceptions to this, programmers and media industry regularly legitimately send high volumes through and shutting them down is bollocks but the latest word was warnings and asking for explanations.bit torrent info.
This stuff is leaking everywhere, its not hidden, yet.2 good starting points that will not have zero impact.
-
I didn't pick it up from your brief history but was there any experience in there of working at isp level?
You read and read and read and don't actually see a thing, it appears.
If you think you're raising my blood pressure, sorry to disappoint. I just get emphatic when responding to trolls. And like it or not, you do meet the definition of troll.
-
identifying those files which would be 90% of movie piracy would be a relatively small part of the work. getting the other 10% would be massive. applying it to music, even worse.
Ok, so someone's sharing a movie. You know what the name of it is cause when you search you see the name. You download the torrent and can see the peers.
So now you have a name & a bunch of IPs. But you have no idea what the torrent content is. So you have to download it. Which is relatively easy.
Easy if you're a client... ie. the RIAA using MediaSentry, etc. (Who, btw, they just fired...).
But as an ISP all you're seeing a bunch of bits over a certain protocol. You have no idea what it is until you put it all together. You might be able to get the name, and you'll know the 2 ends (well, the external IP...). If you're lucky to be able to get all the bits and put them together, then you might find that the song Chasing Cars is actually the sound of the cars going past Matthew's room.
Now, add in encryption. Many of the bittorrent clients now support encryption. Many other P2P programs do as well.
So either the ISP has to break the encryption, or it has to do man-in-the-middle... which is detectable. Realistically it's infeasible to break the encryption on every connection. One torrent could have 10 connections open... the resources would far outweigh the benefits, and there's no guarantee that it is what the name says.
Oh... and I won't even mention the (official) poisoning that goes on on some torrent sites & P2P programs.
Your 90% just became a lot hard to verify...
-
data usage.
yes there are exceptions to this, programmers and media industry regularly legitimately send high volumes through and shutting them down is bollocks but the latest word was warnings and asking for explanations.Ah, due process bedamned, eh? Guilty until proven innocent...
& I argued your bittorrent comment above.
-
Ah, due process bedamned, eh?
absolutely, its bollocks and I've said it a few times on different threads, but I'm not the one making it up, I'm observing,
What would you consider a correct way to do due process Cameron.
you notice in my comment you quoted I didn't say anything conviction without proof, I just noted it was an indication.
The last thing I read was it was inquiry and ask for explanation however well that might go. If all you've got to do is say you're a programmer and its work related than that's my new job description too -
eight of them in network engineering roles or related, including at major ISPs.
can you tell us what you did there?
-
You read and read and read and don't actually see a thing, it appears
.
actually I did miss the isp comment tucked away in your post, just like you missed many key points of where I'm discussing this from in mine, I'll point those out for you as they come up politely, as I have(not backing whats happening just observing & discussing, not an industry person etc)
And like it or not, you do meet the definition of troll.
and like it or not I can't seem to get excited by being called one, it means nothing to me, sorry, I wish I could be offended for you but its just a still word out of roll playing games to me.
-
thanks Cameron
that was a well reasoned read.I did pull the figure 90% out my arse of course figuring 90% of people who use the net are not tech geeks, (perhaps its 85%). you'll of course know this by the numbers of brothers and cousins who ask you to fix something simple on their computer cos you understand computers.
the gist of my point is, I think if you make it less than piss easy to download you're going to see a big drop off in people who will do it.
maybe its 90% maybe its 75% but that will probably be seen as a success considering the present trend to no obstacle what so ever to downloading apart from bit torrent client filtering.Thanks again for your post, it was well written and easily understood.
-
@robbery: Part of the problem with the current situation is that it's all based on lies, lies & statistics.
The movie industry had one of it's best years ever, and it's been the start of a recession. 2006 I think it was was one of their worst in recent years. They blamed piracy, yet there's been no major changes in movie piracy rate since then. Maybe it had something to do with crap movies...
The RIAA always pulls out numbers about piracy, and how it's killing the industry. Anyone with 1/2 a brain can see that suing your customers is not a long-term solution. Seems the RIAA is waking up to that fact, as the US law system is starting to swing against them. I think they're about to suffer a whole lot of hurt.
The numbers the RIAA pull out always go on about how big the problem is, but don't tend to actually BACK them up. Various studies have been done into the numbers and most call the RIAA out on them, and some have even pointed out that quite a lot of people go & buy a CD or two after listening to a couple of tracks they download. iTunes Store is the biggest musci store on the planet - and they've just announced multi-tier pricing and no DRM. Taken a while, but seems they're finally realising this Internet thing can actually make them money.
To give you an idea of how the media industry likes to manipulate numbers:
A couple of years ago, the movie Sione's Wedding was copied from a pre-release cut. It got thrown around locally a little bit, but didn't have a huge impact on the local p2p sites.In one report on the court case they claimed to have lost $150k in sales from movies & DVDs. By the end of the court case that number had increased to over $500k I believe. Ticket sales alone was estimated to have lost $300k - that's probably about 20,000 bums on seats. How many people do you know who saw it at the movies? I don't think I know anyone, and I also don't know anyone who got a copy before it was released.
Oh, and poor little Sione's Wedding broke the local box office records when it was released.
-
The numbers the RIAA pull out always go on about how big the problem is, but don't tend to actually BACK them up
I linked to it earlier but unit sales of music are up around the world in 2008. In dollar terms and CD terms sales are well down and the industry are crying gloom still but to me that simply points towards a failure, or structural inability, of the recording industry to adjust to a new playing field not dominated by traditional forms. They might be hurting but the music is not and for those at the coalface the adjustment has already been made.
2009/10 are likely to be the last years that the big 4 actually substantially matter as they simply will no longer be able to offer anything of value to a recording artist after physical distribution ceases to be dominant, and that is happening faster than anyone they've relied on for analysis has predicted.
This attempt to control something they can't control (in NZ appearing as S92a) is a last gasp flail. It's Canute-ism, with the waves being the recording industry in a post major label future which is still being defined.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.