http://p2pnet.net/story/10161

 

 

 

At least read it before commenting!

 

 

 

Im wondering If we can nail them for violation of spam laws?

 

It does technically class as spam after all.

 

It would be nice to see the lawsuit table turn.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I wonder if we can all start using this as a legal defense?

That isn't spam. There is no legal recourse.

That isn't spam. There is no legal recourse.

 

 

 

How is it not spam?!

 

 

 

Did you read what they are planning to do?

Yes; release adverts in the place of pirated songs on peer to peer networks. It just means that someone who is trying to illegally get a song gets something else instead. Tell me how that is spam.

Yes; release adverts in the place of pirated songs on peer to peer networks. It just means that someone who is trying to illegally get a song gets something else instead. Tell me how that is spam.

 

 

 

OMG! I've had this happen with some songs. But In get some weird thing, where President Clinton says he didn't have sex with that woman, and then advertises a website. :-k

I doubt they'll be successful.

 

 

 

People can simply filter out what they want and don't want when downloading and uploading files.

 

 

 

Plus there are a whole lot more "original" files than there are fakes.

People can simply filter out what they want and don't want when downloading and uploading files.

 

 

 

The point is that the advertising files have the same hash as the originals, meaning they CAN'T filter it out.

People can simply filter out what they want and don't want when downloading and uploading files.

 

 

 

The point is that the advertising files have the same hash as the originals, meaning they CAN'T filter it out.

 

 

 

Won't user ratings kind of filter it indirectly?

Yes, but of course it depends on whether the medium in question has user ratings.

 

 

 

Also, the way I see it, people have such fast connections nowadays that it really won't matter. There will still be an abundance of 'the real deal' on the networks so it will be a case of people taking 1 minute to download something, hearing it isn't it then getting the real thing.

 

 

 

They aren't gonna realise it isn't what they were after then stay to listen to adverts for 3 mintues. They will hear it isn't it after 10 seconds then delete it.

Exactly, people who figure out those specific files are fakes will just delete them.

 

 

 

The less seeds, peers, hubs, sources, people, etc. who upload them, the less they will spread.

 

 

 

Plus some of those ads simply look suspicious to begin with.

 

IE, Music files are normally around 3-6 Megabytes in filesize.

 

 

 

Fake music files are usually in the KB range on the other hand...

 

 

 

They're fairly easy to spot once you get exposed to them. :-k

They would make them the full size... It is gonna be audio adverts encoded into the same format for the same time so it will be the same size.

 

 

 

The trick is that it will have the same hash so it will look EXACTLY like the real deal. Exactly. Meaning it won't be possible for a user, faced with the file alone on a peer to peer service (and no user ratings, comments etc.) to distinguish it from the actual song.

Yeah I figured as much... :-k

 

 

 

Well then it would depend on which programs people use.

 

 

 

Cause I know some programs that have files inspected first before they spread it. (Scanned for virus, actual content, etc.)

 

 

 

Programs like limewire, kazaa, gnutella, etc. where people can upload anonymously seem to be the target of those guys...

 

 

 

I don't expect it to spread from filesharing programs to filesharing programs however.

They've been doing this for years and years (though not with replacing them with adverts - that seems to be the new thing).

 

 

 

I read an article about it about a year ago, so only remember it vaguely. It talked about one of these outside companies they hired to plant fake files, and said that basically it wasn't worth it because the 'critical mass' required to get the fake file prominently shared over real files was too high and required too many resources.

 

 

 

 

 

If you're looking for humorous anti-piracy practices, I read about this on Slashdot recently. The MPAA has introduced a merit badge in Scouts for not pirating.

 

 

 

 

Scouts will now be able to learn a merit badge for anti-piracy related activities, including creating public service announcements urging others not to steal movies or music.

 

Isnt spam legal in half the US states anyway?

Isnt spam legal in half the US states anyway?

 

 

 

Spam is legal to some extent in the U.S. In fact a spammer recently sued spamhaus for $11MillionUSD for blocking them.

 

 

 

Lucky spamhaus is in the UK and dosent have obey the ruling.

 

 

 

Alot of spam I get comes from the U.S.

 

 

 

 

 

What the RIAA plans to do is illegal and is classed as spam the problem we as fileshares have is that we would have to admit to our crime before we could get a shot at them.

 

 

 

 

 

The RIAA Dont want piracy to stop because thats how they make alot of money by lawsuits. If they wanted piracy to stop they would look at selling MP3 downloads and abolish DRM.

 

 

 

Why should I pay for Music Crippled with DRM when I can steal it without DRM. I dont see why I should pay then have to mess around removing DRM from the Media I payed for!

 

 

 

Give me a service that allows me to buy DRMless mp3's and I along with alot of other people would us it.

Where I live, spam is just as legal as web pirating.

 

I'll agree with dusqi on this one. That just won't work: the wonder of p2p is that the system works in an "evolutionary" way, in which the weaker files are left behind and only the most apt survive.

Private torrent networks and PeerGuardian is all you need.

Not pretty much nailed it. Use a private network and your chances of running into one of these bogus files are practically non-existant.

Buy your music and you'll never have a problem, no spam, no trouble with RIAA. No nothing.

Buy your music and you'll never have a problem, no spam, no trouble with RIAA. No nothing.

 

 

 

but why buy a CD full of crap for just one song?

 

 

 

and why pay to recive a rootkit its been known for a long time that you shouldnot open suspicious email attachments.

 

 

 

I think its equally stupid to put a CD from one of these crimminals (Sony BMG) into your computer Sony was caught installing rootkits onto peoples machines the recording industry will never be trustworthy enuth for me to put one of their CDs into my computer again.

If you think they are full of crappy songs, then buy the hit single. Costs you even less, and you've got a cool b-side not featured on the album.

What the RIAA plans to do is illegal and is classed as spam the problem we as fileshares have is that we would have to admit to our crime before we could get a shot at them.

 

 

 

NO IT ISN'T. It is not spam. Spam is sending unsolicited email. This would be you requesting a file, wanting to breach copyright, over a peer to peer network. There is absolutely zero law against pretending a file on a peer to peer network is something else. IT IS NOT SPAM!

 

 

 

I don't know how I could make this any clearer - you have not provided anything that confirms that it is classed as spam. However I can tell you that the CAN SPAM Act of 2003 defines it as "any electronic mail message the primary purpose of which is the commercial advertisement or promotion of a commercial product or service (including content on an Internet website operated for a commercial purpose)". This does not cover songs masquerading on peer to peer networks.

Sorry Dan, but I have to disagree. Spam does not mean shouting a thousand brand names consecutively in a subway. Spam does not mean throwing around a million leaflets asking you to buy a plasma vacuum cleaner. Neither does it mean sending millions of bogus mp3 files to de-facto illegal sites. Read this for more info.

 

 

 

IMO, most people who 'ware' files online, couldn't really care less about what the RIAA thinks or does especially if you use torrent files and indexes. Using programs like LimeWire and Kazaa is just asking for trouble.

 

 

 

As said before, just use a private torrent tracker, there are thousands around. I have never ran across a bogus file on any of these (I'm not going to lie, and yes I do also buy and rent lots of movies) and RIAA is too stupid to even find out what a "tracker" is and how it works. Not only that, but since the uploader only uploads a .torrent file, he can't be held liable for uploading copyrighted content in most countries.

As said before, just use a private torrent tracker, there are thousands around. I have never ran across a bogus file on any of these (I'm not going to lie, and yes I do also buy and rent lots of movies) and RIAA is too stupid to even find out what a "tracker" is and how it works. Not only that, but since the uploader only uploads a .torrent file, he can't be held liable for uploading copyrighted content in most countries.

 

 

 

I've also never found a fake file on these, but I have downloaded .rar files that need passwords, and you are supposed to go to twenty different sites to get it. These are mostly just when you get the "innapropriate" stuff though :lol: .

 

 

 

But the RIAA definently knows about torrents, they aren't as stupid as you say. Two years ago when torrents weren't as big they probably weren't too worried about it, more worried about Kazaa/Limewire. But now torrents are probably more popular than either of those, and the RIAA isn't stupid. They are in this for the money, they are going to have experts working for them.

Experts who operate on the principle that an IP == a person.