Dubstepforum.com

SSL encrypted and/or wireless traffic is impossible to monitor effectively. same with online filesharing sites like rapidshare. you could simply say you were tricked into downloading it, via another link and so on.

basically, it will be an absolute nightmare to manage and you'll no doubt hear horror stories of kids who had their broadband removed and turned to crime, etc

good luck with this you greedy fucking stnuc.

and so it begins

its not as impossible to monitor as you'd think. p2p net traffic is easily detected. especially torrents. there's loads of software filters and firewalls that can pick up someone using torrents in a matter of minutes, and then just choke that computer if its on a network or choke the IP accordingly. at my work they block facebook now, and the moment you try and use it over the LAN the firewall picks it up and chokes the connection completely to a crawl. they can also do this with any URL or any specific ports on your computer. for example, most browsers use port 443. you can set the software to choke all ports except 443. isp's could do this automatically to you in a matter of seconds.

paulie wrote:Not sure how enforceable this will actually be, and that is the problem. If, and it's a big if, they could get a way of efficiently targeting file sharers to the extent that the problem was eradicated then that would unquestionably be good for music. I guess you could say that any action that scares off some people has merit, but the danger is that innocent people get hit, and it's not like the British government has a good track record with IT.

Don't buy the argument that everyone does it so the industry has to live with it - the bottom line is that it's stealing.

of course innocent people will get hit. and in some respects this will make everyone lock down their wireless broadband, so that other people can't use it. its going to be very tricky to implement, but should the government, make a ruling, ISP's won;t have a choice. their defense would be.."you were warned". the biggest potentially explosive hurdle to get past is who or what committee would be given power to say which URL's or which type of traffic would get shut down, and which would be let through.

lily allen getting attacked on the net is a good indicator of how angry this will make people. on the other hand MCPS have to do something, because there's two upcoming generations of kids that think that music and movies are free, and its not big deal to share them. they're never going to allow that to go on to another generation of kids.

i dunno, imo i think it'll be hard for them to police,,, i think a majority of the big fish sharing illegal files can easily break into a "locked" router, or can easily hide or scramble an ip address... sounds like a lot of bluster to me. kudos to the industry if they can tho

seckle wrote:its not as impossible to monitor as you'd think. p2p net traffic is easily detected. especially torrents. there's loads of software filters and firewalls that can pick up someone using torrents in a matter of minutes, and then just choke that computer if its on a network or choke the IP accordingly. at my work they block facebook now, and the moment you try and use it over the LAN the firewall picks it up and chokes the connection completely to a crawl. they can also do this with any URL or any specific ports on your computer. for example, most browsers use port 443. you can set the software to choke all ports except 443. isp's could do this automatically to you in a matter of seconds.

Torrents, sure. They've always been easy to spot though, since your IP is effectively on show every time you download something (unless you proxy). The problem with port throttling is that many legitimate (non-fileshare) programs require ports to be open to be used. Even consoles need them open if you're gaming. The moment ISPs implement something like this, the outcry (and mass disconnections by disgruntled customers) will be massive. It is counter-productive for a government wanting mass-rollout of broadband in the first place.

Until casual users geek themselves up with internet technology and security, it was be impossible to police effectively. There are about 5 open wireless networks on my street alone.. i've even considered killing my broadband account and just using theirs hahaha. But seriously, torrents aside, I just can't see how they can handle online filehosting sites (which seem to be the most popular way of trading files these days) and especially AUTH TLS encrypted FTP.

Cut off one means for people to download and something else will be developed that works around the law. Thats exactly how torrents beat the last generation of dedicated server P2P programs.

Here is how to avoid detection(suck in the irony of me telling you this, it's the last time I'll ever help you rob me. and if I catch you stealing from me, I'm suing you... your risk, etc...)

A seedbox is a private dedicated server used for the uploading and downloading of digital files. Seedboxes generally make use of the BitTorrent protocol for uploading and downloading, although they have also been used on the eDonkey2000 network. Seedboxes are usually connected to a high speed network, often with a throughput of 100 Mbit/s or more. Files are uploaded to a seedbox from other BitTorrent users, and from there they can be downloaded at high speeds to a user's personal computer via the HTTP, FTP, SFTP, or rsync protocols.

Seedboxes can run on most major operating systems (Windows, Linux, or Mac OS X). More expensive seedboxes may provide VNC connection, or remote desktop protocol on some Windows-based seedboxes, allowing many popular clients to be run remotely. Other seedboxes are special purpose and run variety of torrent specific software including web interfaces of popular clients like Transmission, rTorrent and μTorrent, as well as the TorrentFlux web interface clients.

Seedboxes on high speed networks are typically able to download large files within minutes, provided that the swarm can actually handle such a high upload bandwidth. Seedboxes generally have download and upload speeds of 100 megabits per second. This means that a 1 GB file can finish downloading in under 2 minutes. That same 1 gigabyte file can be uploaded to other users in the same amount of time, creating a 1:1 upload:download ratio for that individual file. The ability of a seedbox to transfer files so quickly is a big attraction seedboxes hold within the P2P and BitTorrent communities.

Because of the mentioned high speeds, seedboxes tend to be extremely popular inside private torrent trackers, where maintaining an upload/download ratio above 1 can be very important.

Due to high bandwidth demands for such uses, many server and hosting providers choose to disallow torrents.

My suggestion?

Google "KimSufi" and translate the ***FRENCH*** KimSufi page into your language. Only the FRENCH KimSufi will allow seed boxes.

Viva la France, baby. Best box company on the planet. I personally have a 1gig upstream pipe and unlimited transfer on my box. I bought it for another purpose, but I checked and they DO allow seed boxes. Your move RIAA. You and a couple mates will probably have to throw down unless you have 99 gbp per month, but even then what do you normally pay per month for your shit 3mbps downstream connection anyway? Probably a lot. Add it up... unlimited bandwidth(you can resell the bandwidth to 100 small websites at 10gbp per month lol) and 1gbps ***upstream***.

Unstoppable by the Government. How well does it work?




This was when it was a 100mbps burstable...

So the question here is an ethical one for me... would I rather have private citizens violate my copyrights, or the government have potentially dangerous control over the internet? They may stop filesharing, but what happens when they all begin to stop dissent, news reports, etc? It happens in nuff countries in the world already. You wanna live in North Korea? I hear they have bitchin protection from copyright thiefs there. Your connection is TOTALLY throttled.

It's important to remember the past, but not LIVE in the past. The future is now. Also, only people using public/HUGE private trackers will even be affected. And what about Usenet? lol.

Besides Paulie... how many tune submissions do you download in any given day? Odds are you'll probably be throttled for being a big label downloading large numbers of mp3/wav/etc...

surface_tension wrote:Here is how to avoid detection(suck in the irony of me telling you this, it's the last time I'll ever help you rob me. and if I catch you stealing from me, I'm suing you... your risk, etc...)

Sue us? LOL. I spose at least you've moved up a notch from your previous threats of internet violence.

Anyway, from what I read, suspensions of connections and suchlike are only temporary anyway and I seriously doubt anything will come of it in the first place. Until then, if you are still paranoid, then avoid any P2P software that broadcasts your IP address publicly (this means all torrents, private or otherwise) and preferably use systems that allow SSL/TLS encryption of all data you send/receive.

dr h wrote:

surface_tension wrote:Here is how to avoid detection(suck in the irony of me telling you this, it's the last time I'll ever help you rob me. and if I catch you stealing from me, I'm suing you... your risk, etc...)

Sue us? LOL. I spose at least you've moved up a notch from your previous threats of internet violence.

Anyway, from what I read, suspensions of connections and suchlike are only temporary anyway and I seriously doubt anything will come of it in the first place. Until then, if you are still paranoid, then avoid any P2P software that broadcasts your IP address publicly (this means all torrents, private or otherwise) and preferably use systems that allow SSL/TLS encryption of all data you send/receive.

I can name 3 trackers that have been issued cease and desists and have blocked our releases from even being submitted to the site. You don't need to sue, you need to threaten to sue. And a seedbox in a country that doesn't care about torrents will get you around the problem. 100%. You close the store, you close the sales. i.e. you don't sue the downloader, you sue the seeder and the host of the information. I don't care about good will toward men if you are robbing me. I don't care if it costs your "support" if your support was in the form of robbing me.

Regardless, I just told you how to do it. Do you have the balls?

Go buy a copy of our release and try it out.

surface_tension wrote:

dr h wrote:

surface_tension wrote:Here is how to avoid detection(suck in the irony of me telling you this, it's the last time I'll ever help you rob me. and if I catch you stealing from me, I'm suing you... your risk, etc...)

Sue us? LOL. I spose at least you've moved up a notch from your previous threats of internet violence.

Anyway, from what I read, suspensions of connections and suchlike are only temporary anyway and I seriously doubt anything will come of it in the first place. Until then, if you are still paranoid, then avoid any P2P software that broadcasts your IP address publicly (this means all torrents, private or otherwise) and preferably use systems that allow SSL/TLS encryption of all data you send/receive.

I can name 3 trackers that have been issued cease and desists and have blocked our releases from even being submitted to the site. You don't need to sue, you need to threaten to sue. And a seedbox in a country that doesn't care about torrents will get you around the problem. 100%. You close the store, you close the sales. i.e. you don't sue the downloader, you sue the seeder and the host of the information. I don't care about good will toward men if you are robbing me. I don't care if it costs your "support" if your support was in the form of robbing me.

Regardless, I just told you how to do it. Do you have the balls?

Go buy a copy of our release and try it out.

If I bought your release today and ripped it/uploaded it onto the net, you wouldn't have a clue it was me who did it. Once it hits the torrent/blogs/p2p programs, you can't stop it. Period. Yes it sucks for the artist and the label, but theres literally nothing you can do about it. Pull down one tracker or rapidshare link and 5 more will appear. Unless you spend every waking minute of your life constantly searching for and threatening hosting sites/owners, then you can't stop it. Good luck threatening a russian-based website with your legal threats, they'll laugh at you soviet-style.

Learn the legalities (and indeed the cost of actually "sueing" someone) before writing your retarded crap on here. Much bigger labels than your own have tried and failed. The smarter indie labels actually observe the current music climate and adapt to it, rather than treat their entire potential support base as criminals-in-waiting.

Anyway, my point is mute. With an attitude like yours, I don't think you need to worry about people stealing your music in the first place.

I should also add that I don't endorse piracy at all and run two labels of my own. My point is that constant threats of legal/physical action only make people despise you more. Treat people fairly and they'll usually do the same to you.

dr h wrote:I should also add that I don't endorse piracy at all and run two labels of my own. My point is that constant threats of legal/physical action only make people despise you more. Treat people fairly and they'll usually do the same to you.

If someone is robbing you and your only legal recourse is a lawsuit, they can get fucked. It's not about respect. They already don't respect me or why would they be jacking us? I don't want their respect if they want to steal our tunes.

surface_tension wrote:

dr h wrote:I should also add that I don't endorse piracy at all and run two labels of my own. My point is that constant threats of legal/physical action only make people despise you more. Treat people fairly and they'll usually do the same to you.

If someone is robbing you and your only legal recourse is a lawsuit, they can get fucked. It's not about respect. They already don't respect me or why would they be jacking us? I don't want their respect if they want to steal our tunes.

Ha, almost every thread i i see your user name in your throwing threats around, it gets kind of boring reading it over and over...

We understand you dont like people "jacking" you so can you please give it a rest, the thread had nothing to do with your label/music and how you choose to protect it...

surface_tension wrote:

dr h wrote:I should also add that I don't endorse piracy at all and run two labels of my own. My point is that constant threats of legal/physical action only make people despise you more. Treat people fairly and they'll usually do the same to you.

If someone is robbing you and your only legal recourse is a lawsuit, they can get fucked. It's not about respect. They already don't respect me or why would they be jacking us? I don't want their respect if they want to steal our tunes.

Because people aren't robbing you, they're getting something for free. There's a difference between stopping you from making money off that particular download, and stealing money from your house. One is money you can have (most likely they wont buy your tunes, but if theyre getting em for free they might as well download them) and the other is money you do have. Don't make it sound like someone's breaking and entering here; its simply cheapass kids who wouldnt pay for music in the first place, not hardened criminals.

borrowed wrote:

surface_tension wrote:

dr h wrote:I should also add that I don't endorse piracy at all and run two labels of my own. My point is that constant threats of legal/physical action only make people despise you more. Treat people fairly and they'll usually do the same to you.

If someone is robbing you and your only legal recourse is a lawsuit, they can get fucked. It's not about respect. They already don't respect me or why would they be jacking us? I don't want their respect if they want to steal our tunes.

Because people aren't robbing you, they're getting something for free. There's a difference between stopping you from making money off that particular download, and stealing money from your house. One is money you can have (most likely they wont buy your tunes, but if theyre getting em for free they might as well download them) and the other is money you do have. Don't make it sound like someone's breaking and entering here; its simply cheapass kids who wouldnt pay for music in the first place, not hardened criminals.

Doesn't make it right. It is stealing.

(Pada) wrote:

borrowed wrote:

surface_tension wrote:

dr h wrote:I should also add that I don't endorse piracy at all and run two labels of my own. My point is that constant threats of legal/physical action only make people despise you more. Treat people fairly and they'll usually do the same to you.

If someone is robbing you and your only legal recourse is a lawsuit, they can get fucked. It's not about respect. They already don't respect me or why would they be jacking us? I don't want their respect if they want to steal our tunes.

Because people aren't robbing you, they're getting something for free. There's a difference between stopping you from making money off that particular download, and stealing money from your house. One is money you can have (most likely they wont buy your tunes, but if theyre getting em for free they might as well download them) and the other is money you do have. Don't make it sound like someone's breaking and entering here; its simply cheapass kids who wouldnt pay for music in the first place, not hardened criminals.

Doesn't make it right. It is stealing.

I dont think he is saying its right he is simply stating the difference between someone stealing something and someone getting something for free...

Most people who pay for music still will even if they can get it for free, the people who are "stealing" music wouldn't buy it even if that was the only way to get it in my opinion.

(Sorry if that doesn't make much sense)

as long as you don't download the commercial bullshit that's out there you should be OK, right?

borrowed wrote:

surface_tension wrote:

dr h wrote:I should also add that I don't endorse piracy at all and run two labels of my own. My point is that constant threats of legal/physical action only make people despise you more. Treat people fairly and they'll usually do the same to you.

If someone is robbing you and your only legal recourse is a lawsuit, they can get fucked. It's not about respect. They already don't respect me or why would they be jacking us? I don't want their respect if they want to steal our tunes.

Because people aren't robbing you, they're getting something for free. There's a difference between stopping you from making money off that particular download, and stealing money from your house. One is money you can have (most likely they wont buy your tunes, but if theyre getting em for free they might as well download them) and the other is money you do have. Don't make it sound like someone's breaking and entering here; its simply cheapass kids who wouldnt pay for music in the first place, not hardened criminals.

If they don't buy them, they don't have the right to have them. It's theft. End of discussion for me, I'm not going to debate it. It's stealing, we have rights and they are being violated. I don't care if it costs us sales for me to say that. Cry about it, it's is my opinion. I do not differentiate stealing from the store or stealing online. You took something that was for sale and didn't pay for it. In an American court if you and your friend go to rob a store and your buddy kills the store clerk, you are both charged with murder. In for a penny, in for a pound. Don't steal and your trigger happy friend won't get you life in prison.

lol, outlawing the future will never work. ever. such is the nature.

to think that some obsolete monolith can regulate the kids who have now grown up online totally exposes how disconnected the old world is from the youth.

by the time the music & media INDUSTRIES are done scratching their heads & trying to decipher wtf is even going on, the kids will have changed the landscape entirely.

its already over. and thats a beautiful thing.

surface_tension wrote: I do not differentiate stealing from the store or stealing online.

The American legal system, other the other hand, does.

Supreme Court wrote: The infringer of a copyright does not assume physical control over the copyright nor wholly deprive its owner of its use. Infringement implicates a more complex set of property interests than does run-of-the-mill theft, conversion, or fraud.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dowling_v. ... %281985%29