off topic new Kazaa lite riaa they can not track you

[spiderman2k1]

new Kazaa lite they can only see one file that they search for they can not see your share file's you can download it here

http://www.techtv.com/screensavers/answerstips/story/0,24330,3464142,00.html

[Tommyknocker]

Why are you worrying about RIAA tracking you?

[The village idiot]

Seeing the files is not enough for action! Unless you downloaded those files from their computer

When they download, and verify the files you are still screwed!!!

Unless someone can correct me.....

There is no anonymity with P2P! They will get your IP when they download from your machine! They will get your IP when you download from their machine! Sooner or later they will put "junk" files or real files on their machines, and offer them for download. When you do, then they will be able to send you a cease and desist notice. They will be able to do this because they have your IP and their log showing that you "stole" XXXX file. The undercover police do not have to sell you real drugs in order to arrest you for buying from them. The act of buying is enough for conviction. This will soon apply to P2P unless someone comes up with a real proxy system. Peerguardian will not protect you when you download! It only offers very limited protection for your upload. Protection that you could get with any good firewall and the list of IP's!

Now then. If I'm am wrong about P2P, someone please correct me. And provide links to the software or service so that I (and others) can check into it. I'm not really into P2P so chances that there is something out there are good.

As to what I suggest for your thievery, you'll just have to guess.

[jarvis1781]

you are indeed correct about the P2P systems

all they need is the transaction, they don't need to "see" any of your files

P2P is like a parasite, eating up tons of bandwidth every day and ripping off millions every day

use it now and you will be caught

[energy80s]

Isn't life great!

[mysticgohan17]

Village, what do you mean by "xxx file"?

[The village idiot]

No not XXX, xxxxx. Pron is easier to get by other means

[poopyhead]

hopefully, the ISPs will prevail on the privacy issue. just because the RIAA supposedly has your IP, they still need to contact the ISP to connect a name to it.

i'm thinking if shell accounts will be able to mask the ip address???

[The village idiot]

hopefully, the ISPs will prevail on the privacy issue. just because the RIAA supposedly has your IP, they still need to contact the ISP to connect a name to it.

i'm thinking if shell accounts will be able to mask the ip address???

Verizon just lost that battle. The thread is up in news somewhere. There is now precedent set where the ISP must turn over the offending person's info. There is now very little stopping the DMCA violations from coming in.

If you can find some kind of shell account. Or if you can find and configure a socks proxy for P2P. I haven't done either of those, so can't help there.

[Gurm]

I think the POINT the original poster was making was that the RIAA has stated that they will only be going after people sharing "a large number of files".

This way you don't appear to be sharing a large number of files.

But their tactics could change, and anyone with half a brain has been using K++ all along, so... this is really moot.

- Gurm

[mysticgohan17]

thay should start to serve real files. like high quality transfers of summer blockbusters. and pr0n.

[poopyhead]

thay should start to serve real files. like high quality transfers of summer blockbusters. and pr0n.

heh...i thought every1 loves the .avi re-encode of the crappy vcd encode of CAM movies w/ people standing in front of the screen and babies crying

[JasonK]

Yeh, that's old news for a lot of people.

And I think some people did miss the original poster's point. Downloading on these p2p networks hasn't slowed down much from what I've read. They are going after people sharing the largest amounts of files first. But there are no guarantees. There are millions of people sharing, so they have to pick and choose. Enjoy.

[Tommyknocker]

heh...i thought every1 loves the .avi re-encode of the crappy vcd encode of CAM movies w/ people standing in front of the screen and babies crying

Not me. Downloading warez is like digging in a fancy restaurant's garbage. You may fine pieces of filet mignon, caviar, etc., but what else will you find? Why not go in the front door and sit down the way you are supposed and the owner wants you to eat? Sure, you have to pay for it, but is that so bad?

[rallynavvie]

Telesyncs (when they film the film with a camcorder while in a theater) are awful. DVD screeners are the good pre-release videos, but they're not always easy to come by (it means someone high-up has to be corrupt enough to rip it to video and share it). But then I don't know anything about the above actions. Actually if I want to see a movie I have no problem shelling out $8 for a ticket to see it on the big screen.

The RIAA isn't going to get very far with their battle plans. I don't think the ISPs are going to want to alienate customers in that way. Isn't it possible to set up a hardware firewall in your home that is able to mess with others trying to get your IP address?

At the same time are they not supposed to identify themselves as law enforcement or an RIAA official to you if you ask? I thought there was some sort of legal precedent about self-incrimination and entrapment. The only way around that is to have a court order stating they can be "undercover", but if it were a blanket order so that they could use it all the time there'd be some serious privacy rights violations. But then privacy won't matter to us in the States at all if the Patriot Act gets passed

[Mirror_Image]

At the same time are they not supposed to identify themselves as law enforcement or an RIAA official to you if you ask? I thought there was some sort of legal precedent about self-incrimination and entrapment.

That's an urban legend. Undercover LEOs are under no legal obligation to admit their identity.

[tenders]

do DMCA violations apply to every country,or just the U.S.A

[The village idiot]

do DMCA violations apply to every country,or just the U.S.A

So far just USA, but I think they are creeping into Canada to get you Canadian pirates. It won't be DMCA, but whatever your government sets up.

At the same time are they not supposed to identify themselves as law enforcement or an RIAA official to you if you ask?

Hello kind server, are you operated by the Feds or RIAA? Don't think it will answer you.

[Mirror_Image]

if the Patriot Act gets passed

The USA Patriot Act was signed into law, Oct. 26, 2001.

Missed that, did you?

[scottymac]

...Downloading warez is like digging in a fancy restaurant's garbage. You may fine pieces of filet mignon, caviar, etc., but what else will you find? Why not go in the front door and sit down the way you are supposed and the owner wants you to eat? Sure, you have to pay for it, but is that so bad?

How about going to that fancy restaurant, paying top dollar for what you think is a porterhouse, and getting ground chuck?

It costs waaaay too much money to go to a movie to find out that all the best parts were in the preview.

For us, we have to hire a babysitter, pay for gas to get to the theatre, parking fees, outrageous ticket prices, and pay the massive markup on pop and popcorn. Runs us about $60CDN to take in one movie, that's a lot of money to find out it's crap.

And I do not go for the argument that piracy costs the movie industry billons of dollars. That is Hogwash. The most money the movie endustry has ever seen flowed through their coffers last year. And if I remember correctly FTP sites, IRC, Usenet, and P2P were all running strong last year. Plus, most people I know dish out the mucho dineros to see it on the big screen, then download it for a home copy if they like it, and then buy the DVD with all the extras when it comes out.

I do not feel bad about downloading and watching the so called "summer blockbusters" and then deciding for myself whether we want to dish out the dough and go see it on the bigscreen, or wait til I can purchase the retail DVD.

[housepig]

hopefully, the ISPs will prevail on the privacy issue. just because the RIAA supposedly has your IP, they still need to contact the ISP to connect a name to it.

That's if the ISP wants to fight - I recall seeing something on Slashdot recently about how AOL has assured government agencies that they will fully comply with any request for information...

ISP's are in a tight spot as well - they don't want to alienate customers by being labelled as pushovers for "the man", but on the other hand their immunity from prosecution rests on a fine line - because right now they are judged to be "distributors" or "common carriers" rather than "publishers" or "republishers" of the information that streams through them.

But the precedents that I've seen are somewhat murky - it wouldn't be that hard to flip and say that an ISP is the "republisher" of everything it transmits, and therefore just as liable as the content poster for anything libelous or illegal...

interesting article, focused on ISP liability for libel : http://writ.news.findlaw.com/dean/20030704.html