kazaa users beware!!!

[The village idiot]

RIAA = money & greed

Money & Greed = Evil

RIAA = EVIL!

[Jukka]

Isn't it impossible to hide your IP address. After all if you connect through an ISP they allocate you an IP address for the seesion (unless you upgrade to static IPs). All ISPs have an allocated range of IP addresses therefore they can be traced by the RIAA and they can then say who exactly connected via which IP address, etc. Just go to any site that can display your IP address, it will usually show your ISP name aswell!

As for Freenet I would recommend not using that at all. You agree to share a portion of your HD and can't control whats on it? What happens if there is child porn in there?

[nick1977]

To me the whole argument is ill-founded. I use p2p occasionally, not regularly, for the simple reason that I can get hold of the odd song that I hear played on radio / TV without buying a whole album. The fact that I have d/l that track does *not* affect sales, as I would simply not have it at all if I were having to pay for it. I would more likely just record of TV / Radio instead
Add to that the fact that many of my friends will then hear this track, I would say I'm actually doing the artist a favour by creating awareness. The one thing I am not doing is negatively affecting sales of CD's. That said, I know everyone is different, but if I like a few tracks from an album then I will buy the album. I never have, and would never contemplate, d/l a whole album.

Nick

[Don2050]

Maybe we could start a thread on counter measures to the corporate hackers/spys and keep each other updated on current methods they are using and workarounds to those methods....

Not an riaa/mpaa bashing thread but a analyitical one more technical based to help us avoid the ridiculous/illegal paid for laws that they are entrenching in the U.S. (gotta love what money can get you in this country, your own made up laws)

Here is list of public proxies and some info on it.

http://www.publicproxyservers.com/index.html

I have been thinking on possible solutions but I am not skilled enough to really develope any. I know you can use proxies or anonymizers or spoof your IP, but need more feedback as the best ways to do this.

I am thinking that as of now, the best way to avoid IP tracing is using an anonymizing proxy server located outside the US preferably one not friendly to the US or at least not easily 'persuaded' by them.

[flaninacupboard]

Pakman,
the price of CD's can be an issue for quite a few people. My partner is currently out of work, things are tight. The first thing that stops is my purchase of CD's and DVD's. i still want to listen to music and watch films, so downloading is an option. the things i like, i will go out and buy in the (hopefully!!) near future when i can afford it. the 300 DVD's in the cabinet and the 150cds in the rack is testament to that.
Sometimes downloading harms sales. A quick listen of three tracks from "the golden age of grotesque" was enough to confirm marilyn manson is still cack. i didn't buy it. so did downloading lose the industry money? no. i bought the new deftones album instead. so is this any different than listening to a friends copy of a cd and deciding it was rubbish..........no.

[warlock110]

[quote="pakman"]

the price to produce a CD is as listed: blank CD 10 cents, cover and case 50-70 cents, and they are saleing it for more than 15 bucks per cd, check that out, no wonder people are downloading music.

I'm sorry if this sounds like a flame but that is one of the most ignorant comments. That is like saying it only costs Microsoft $1 to develop an operating system.

The costs you have listed are variable costs. These increase per extra unit produced. What about the fixed costs? The money they have to pay for things like marketing, artists contracts, production costs and other over heads. That's also not accounting for things like failures. Look at Michael Jackson's latest album. They would have spent a fortune in the production of it and lost big. Therefore to recoup those costs they spread it over the prices of their other products.

LOL... and lets not exclude all the record label management fees, recording studio time, sale & marketing expenses, etc...

amen... pacmania you beat me to it. that was a WAY over-simplication of the true costs of putting out a music CD!

as a student that doesn't have much income, alot of students now a day don't work...

Not to flame as well but... Come on, that's a weak argument. That's like me saying I'm justified in stealing a Ferrari 360 Spyder because I can't afford one based on my current savings/ income. And also, the part about students NOT working, but complaining about not having spending money for music CD's? geez... I hope their parents are just rolling their eyes... welcome to the real world...

The one thing the music recording industry will learn is that the fat profit margins of the past are gone...

ehhh, not to flame, but i think u are flaming me :P dang man i just said a few things and u quote me on everything, i agree that it cost more to make a cd, but the reality is the physical cd itself cost that much, that's why they make "profit" off it to pay for the other addtional cost, but the amount of profit that they get per cd is way to high don't u think. and the part where u talk about stealing a car, this is well base on you "a weak argument" u are comparing downloading with stealing? if u are saying that then every one is stealing because as you surf the web u are downloading images and contents that doesn't belong to u, does that counts as stealing as well? and yeah i said that alot of us don't work, well let me tell u something, students now a day don't have enough time to do homework and take tests, talk about getting a job, look again at the level of education of today, how many "additional" test students has to take, and pretty much they all need extra activities after school, those who play sports, u think they have enough energy left to get a job?

[drewson99]

warlock brings up an interesting point:

if browsing the web, you see an image that you like (say, a logo from a movie or a shot of a video game character) and you decide to right-click and save it so that you have it for personal use.

which laws are violated by this, and how is it distinguished from d/l music?

[pacmania_2001]

What are the chances of someone being called Pakman and another Pacmania on the same forum as well as agreeing with one another? Okay, I'm over it.

students now a day don't have enough time to do homework and take tests, talk about getting a job, look again at the level of education of today, how many "additional" test students has to take, and pretty much they all need extra activities after school, those who play sports, u think they have enough energy left to get a job?

I'm a uni student and I have a job

It is hard I agree with the amount of time studying takes but whether or not that justifies stealing someone elses property is another matter.

[pacmania_2001]

if u are saying that then every one is stealing because as you surf the web u are downloading images and contents that doesn't belong to

If you reuse the content or images on say your own website without the copyright owner's permission it is illegal. It's the same as redistributing music (through a p2p network). You don't have the legal permision to do so, therefore it is illegal.

The difference is that with music/movies the MPAA/RIAA has the means to carry out legal action whilst a small site owner couldn't afford to do so.

[pacmania_2001]

Looks like ARIA (Australian Recording Industry Association) is following suit.

http://www.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,4057,6661868%255E15306,00.html

[The village idiot]

A discussion on using HTTP proxies for fun and safety could be had in OT if anyone is interested. But this won't keep you safe from P2P hazards. Just ask and I'll give you a fairly long post, as taught to me by a friend, D.C. (the Yuckman!). As well as what I have learned while using it. Though some of this info may be borderline for the rules here.

[LanEvo7]

Wouldn't they have to catch you while you are downloading the song? Since US laws allow you to create a ONE "back up" of any book, software, etc. So if they see the songs on your computer, who says that the user didn't just rip it off a CD that they owned.


Regarding the prices on how much retail cds should be, a PC Magazine article analyzed that if music companies were to sell each cd for $4, they would still be making millions.

[pacmania_2001]

Wouldn't they have to catch you while you are downloading the song? Since US laws allow you to create a ONE "back up" of any book, software, etc. So if they see the songs on your computer, who says that the user didn't just rip it off a CD that they owned.

My guess would be that they would be scanning your "My Shared Folder" as that would indicate that you are prepared to trade them.

[ldbs]

LIke i said how much money can one person want.....................
I say go to the Riaa 's house and check their daughters or sons computer and see iif they are downloading any music..

and even if they sold a cd at 2dollar they woudl be rich
think how many people buy a cd.!!

anyway it's not only that,
u pay 14bucks plus the taxes and all dam!

anyway
i guess no one can control RIAA and what they do,
and as for Democracy and what the people care, i guess no one cares. about that

[M1701c]

Check this out. P2P fights back

http://www.usatoday.com/life/music/news/2003-06-26-swap_x.htm

[mysticgohan17]

News. this would be interesting, a virs that forces filesharing, the mpaa and riaa would have no easy way to see who is sharring willingly and who's been attacked by the BruceBlocker virus..

[beric3236]

Just Remember we here in the US have the best government and justice that money can buy ! !

[Sartori]

I see the great human quality of "self delusional justification" is still number one trait here . Apart from people that can`t spell of course

[g_shocker182]

why dont they just shut down kazaa like they did napster because they have crediable evidence that kazaa supports illegal activity and isn't that like the technological "aiding and embedding a known criminal(us)"?

[Reaper88]

why dont they just shut down kazaa like they did napster because they have crediable evidence that kazaa supports illegal activity and isn't that like the technological "aiding and embedding a known criminal(us)"?

I dont believe that Kazza is based in the u.s. like napster was. Therfor i dont believe that they can shut it down by persueing leagle action.

[txpharoah]

why dont they just shut down kazaa like they did napster because they have crediable evidence that kazaa supports illegal activity and isn't that like the technological "aiding and embedding a known criminal(us)"?

It is not in the U.S., or even in a Berne Convention country, nor is it a single server. It is a true network. If one server gets shut, more take its place. http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/11.02/kazaa.html

[indolikaa]

"There is no presence of Kazaa infidels in the city of Baghdad" Mohammed Saeed al-Sahaf asserted outside Baghdad's Palestine Hotel on Monday.

I have no problem with people making backup copies of their media. I also have no problem with trading material that the RIAA/MPAA think isn't worth keeping in print. Or worse, the practice of putting material in 'moratorium' so that we consumers can be raped over and over again. Now, uploading something like the Star Wars II DVD for all to download, I do have a problem with that. But really, people, there is a bigger issue here.

I thought it was freaky to travel to the ol' USSR back in '85 and spend time with that culture for a few weeks. What's happening in our own country makes the Union look pretty good right now. US Senators suggesting it's OK to blow up computers, and to hell with Due Process?!

I've seen too much of this God-forsaken world. Freedom isn't free, and you have to see truly desparate poverty in a faraway Central Asian "republic" to really appreciate it. This whole Kazaa/RIAA/MPAA thing, maybe we all better get our papers in order, Comrades!

.indolikaa.

[LanEvo7]

why dont they just shut down kazaa like they did napster because they have crediable evidence that kazaa supports illegal activity and isn't that like the technological "aiding and embedding a known criminal(us)"?

Because Kazaa isn't a central hub like napster. The illegal material never really passes through Kazaa's main servers. Kazaa creates a link between the two people and they don't get involved.

[Cyrax9]

Well, everyone's already beaten me to the"This is just like the old USSR" analogy, and the "What ever happened to due Process and a Search Warrent?" questions, however, I find this interesting:

By definition if I already OWN a song, and now I wish to downlod a back-up for myself, say in oh..MP3 FORMAT because I'm too lazy to copy my Record LP or Cassete Tape to CD, should I not be able to download the MP3 off of another person seeing as I've already PAID for the material once?

If I were to move every "New Christy MInstrels" LP I have to CD It'd take years, bu then the new format AFTER DVD-Audio would be out, however, a quick search on a P2P Network and I can download the song I have ALREADY PAID FOR in MP3 format?

Now doesn't the "VCR Law" state that I can retain a back-up copy for myself?

Let me also see what I have on my HDD in my meager MP3 collection, since I've stopped using P2P networks until the first suit is filed and a decision made, I have 284 MP3's--most are things I either already own on CD, or can't even GET on CD because they're only available as DISCONTINUED Record LP's, or Cassette Tapes, and again, I think I have two songs that I don't own the original copy of, and if the RIAA (Really Idiotic Association of America) would run their own P2P network and charge $0.99 a Download, in a format I could BURN TO CD, I'd gladly pay for a download and I'd buy a lot more music than I'm buying now.

I don't support Piracy, but I also don't support unwarented Search and Sezuire and the idea of "You are guilt until proven innocent" and that "Everyone is a priate until proven otherwise", this is the EXACT REASON people HATE the RIAA!

Rather than cut off the source, they go after the reciver's, adn rather than try and use the technology to THEIR advantage they try to get rid of it, if the MPAA had done this with the VCR like they wanted, they'd have gone for Chapter 11 by now!

Someof what I download IS in the Public Domain, and I make an effort to buy a CD of the music I've downloaded, and if it's discontinued, I still tr t get a second hand copy, although the RIAA sill isn't getting anything for that, which raises the question of "How DO you get the money fro Music that's not n shelves but only on the second hand market?" The answer is either You don't get it, or you reiussue it, or you make it available nline and charge for it, somthing the RIAA can't seem to grasp.

As far as "The Hulk" guy goes, he lived in my area, but he was a complete idiot! He didn't even WATCH the movie he was priating! Also, he tried, but failed, to defeat a security tag which usually means "Do NOt COPY!!" and that's just dispciable, at least PAY to SEE the movie ONCE, now if this had been a film from the '80s with no Video Release and someone taped it off the TV I might feel differently, but that was just wrong.

However when you don't offer an Album anymore because "the market is too small" and you sue your fans, your desperate and stupid. Instead of trying to dismantle P2P users the RIAA should just charge "Servers" a Royalty fe like a regualr Music store, and than "leechers" would have to pay the servers just like they do for a CD Sale, in addition, the RIA culd make every song in their vualts AVAILABLE via a LEGAL P2P networ if they tried, and if they spent mroe time figuring out how toe xploit this technology instead of how to destroy it, they'd be turing a much higher profit, Apple has the right idea, the iTunes music store is $0.99 cents a download, and if a CD of 12 Track's cost me $0.99 per song I'd rather Download it than buy it, and in addition, I could get the songs I WANTEd and NOT the songs that are on the CD that I don't want.

The RIAA is desperate if they're sueing fans, and tyhey're still going ot have aproblem with NOn-US bootlegger's, which is why I thin this idea is flawed, their are artists who are mad, as well as fans, and if you've got angry artists and abngry fans and YOU are the association ofr them, let me put it this way, you're in about as good a position as a guy waving a white flag.

Granted I don't think bootlegged Music/Movies should be allowed, but I do think if it's discontinued and a copany turns you away from requesting a copy, pretty much saying they don't wat your money, you should be able to legally download the item, or at the very least the RIAA could giv eus that P2P Pay-NTetwork we were promised after we lost napster, but then again, the RIAa seems about as birght as a dead-lightbulb and I can only see the headlines lioke "RIAA Arresst's college kids for listening to Music' and "X College Supports Piracy" which wll in turn just sink the RIAA deeper into problems, they're running a razor-blade across their throat by doing this, and they have yet to contain the problem of Hong Kong Bootlegs, maybe they sould finish one thing before they start another, justa thought.

Anyway I'm not sharing music any longer, not until I either see the RIAA lose in court and hear a ruling that Filesharing is legal, or until there is concrete evidnce that sharing of ANY file is illegal, as I don't want to eb caught in the middle, I'm pretty sure a few people will boycott CD's until the RIAa lowers prices, just to show, that they can do without them.

The RIAA eeds to realize this is no longer a seller's market, it's a buyer's market and if you run out of buyer's, you go out of buisness, and they're praxctically screaming BANKRUPTME!!" by suing fans, which ou can bet will be on the front page of the paper after the first suits are filed.

[CubDukat]

The record companies are shooting themselves in the foot, and about the only reason they're doing this is because they know they're wrong and they're too pig-headed to deal with it.

Besides, they have to find some way to recoup the money they're being forced to pay out because of that CD price-gouging business.

[CubDukat]

Furthermore, they've said that the FBI is going to get involved.

The FBI can't even find 19 jackasses that like to drive planes into buildings and they're right under their own noses; maybe they should get their damn priorities straight.

[Styro]

They can't shut Kazaa down, like Napster, because Kazaa, unlike Napster, is a >FILE< sharing app. Napster was just about sharing music (or files with specific file extensions). A US judge ruled that Kazaa could stant trial due to the large US customer/client base, but then ruled that Kazaa cannot be ruled against because any file can shared - not just music/movies/copyrighted works.

-- Styro

[Styro]

Getting law enforcement/FBI involved has got to be illegal. Copyright infringement/violations is a civil matter. The complaintant must gather evidence then bring suit in civil court, and unlike criminal court there does not have to be 100% solid evidence and absolute jury guilt finding to prosecute.

-- Styro

[alucard2050]

if i remember correctly there was a thread started on here a while back about a case against kazzaa and i think kazzaa won...i could be wrong though......

[tenders]

i'm only guessing,but i think that in the end, the RIAA/MPAA will win. why?

because their scare tactics are working. i have seen posts on other boards/p2p programs where people say they will "lay low for awhile"

eventually this will spread. ISP's will cancell your service,due to the violation. you can move to another ISP,but eventually the small operators will either give in and fork over your IP address or die holding it back,until there is no where else to go.