RIAA wants your name

[DukenukemX]

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Recording companies won a victory in their fight against online piracy on Tuesday, when a U.S. court ordered Verizon Communications to turn over the name of a customer suspected of downloading more than 600 songs in one day over the Internet.


You can view the article here (http://money.cnn.com/2003/01/21/technology/verizon_songswapper.reut/index.htm).

Jesus christ these guys don't stop. Is it even legal to spy on people on the net? Not that 600 songs in one day isn't a bit too much but come on. This could be bad as the RIAA could use this kid as a example. Even worse they could be allowed to monitor us as we download.

Don't think my firewall software is going to protect me this time.

[Xyvol]

Just so you know, you're not the only one who doesn't agree with this. The poll (http://money.cnn.com/POLLSERVER/results/2218.html)
that goes along with that topic shows 80% don't think Verizon should have to reveal the information.

[Ich]

I hate the music companies. I will stop downloading music as soon as the record companies meet my taste in music. Therefore, I shall never stop downloading music.

[tgf_guy]

This isn't anything new. Internet service providers have been under law to hand over the names of potential criminals for quite some time, but the situation hasn't gotten serious enough for quite some time to warrant a court case.

[Rafnul]

Oh no! The government might actually start enforcing its laws!

[Ian]

Originally posted by Rafnul
Oh no! The government might actually start enforcing its laws!


:eek: That's unheard of! Why can't they start in a few years when people will have enough pirated music on their computers to fill the government's stupid ass.

Though 600 songs in one day is a tad extreme, they shouldn't be able to monitor what we download. No matter how many people they catch, they will never be able to stop me from getting music off the net (though I rarley do anymore)

[Breaker]

Whoever this unlucky soul was better start stashing the music onto another spare harddrive/burn it to cds and throw his computer in the garbage before they break down his door. ;P

If the shit isn't there, how can they convict him? Notice the big word "suspected" in there.

[tgf_guy]

Originally posted by Breaker
If the shit isn't there, how can they convict him? Notice the big word "suspected" in there.

Internet logs don't lie. They can easily go over to Verizon, say, "Hey, pull up the download logs for so and so." and, boom, they've got their guy.

[Rafnul]

But maybe it was all a big mistake, and the files were drawn out randomly to test some sort of automatic download generator and then they were instantly deleted after that. See, there are any number of perfectly logical explanations. ;)

[tgf_guy]

Originally posted by Rafnul
But maybe it was all a big mistake, and the files were drawn out randomly to test some sort of automatic download generator and then they were instantly deleted after that. See, there are any number of perfectly logical explanations. ;)

Instances like that can easily be forgiven, if they only happen once and by accident, but if the logs show:

JAN 14: Bob downloaded (19,999 MEG) file from website (f tp://204.43.23)
JAN 15: Bob downloaded (19,999 MEG) file from website (f tp://204.43.23)
JAN 16: Bob downloaded (19,999 MEG) file from website (f tp://204.43.23)

etc., then the court has something to go on.

[addenum: ftp spelled f tp just incase I accidently link to a porn FTP or something with my example. x_x]

[DarkDragon]

No way a log is going to be sufficient evidence to convict this guy. Perpaps his IP was spoofed, or maybe the Verizon logs were haxxored - there are just too many alternative possibilities.

[Rafnul]

Maybe someone used a backdoor.latinus virus to work through their computer...

[tgf_guy]

Originally posted by DarkDragon
No way a log is going to be sufficient evidence to convict this guy. Perpaps his IP was spoofed, or maybe the Verizon logs were haxxored - there are just too many alternative possibilities.

It would be sufficent evidence to get a search warrant, and if he threw the computer out or smashed it, he could be convicted at the very least with obstruction of justice. (Removing evidence.)

However, he'd really have to sledgehammer it or throw it out. Even if you wipe out a hard-drive, files are still recoverable by a proficient computer expert.

[Shadowblazer]

Originally posted by tgf_guy
However, he'd really have to sledgehammer it or throw it out. Even if you wipe out a hard-drive, files are still recoverable by a proficient computer expert. There are plenty of programs out there that will completely wipe a hard drive. As long as you go deeper than del *.* or format to erase your data, you can certainly make it impossible for even a proficient computer expert to get anything from it.

[DukenukemX]

I think even defraging a hard drive could render the deleted files impossible to recover. Even if they do find mp3s on the computer what then? There could be a hundred excuses he could use to get out of it. The best way would be to of course fully format the hard drive. I just don't see the point of all this.

[El Oso Verde]

The way I see it, if they can track the filenames of files you download, then people will start zipping mp3's, or change the names into some sort of code. If that fails, it's time for IRC. http://users3.ev1.net/~fontlady/nick/smileys/mmbiggrin.gif

[Gerudo]

dunno if you know EOV, but irc has always been there, you just gotta know where to look...

[MottZilla]

The thing is, you may prove with logs, IP address x.x.x.x downloaded X files that they BELIEVE to be by their FILENAME X copyrighted work. If you deleted your files, then they have nothing. They can't prove that YOU downloaded any copyrighted works, because they have NOTHING to go on. The name of a file isn't proof.

The logs an ISP may have may be enough to prove the event happened, but that doesn't prove YOU did it. Really its bullshit. Aren't they supposed to be in the music business not the whine to the government for money business?