Slashdot Log In
RIAA MediaSentry, Dead In US, Is Alive In Australia
Posted by
kdawson
on Fri May 22, 2009 10:57 AM
from the down-under-up-for dept.
from the down-under-up-for dept.
newtley writes "Disgraced and discredited 'private investigator' MediaSentry, fired by former patrons Vivendi Universal, EMI, Warner Music, and Sony Music and their RIAA, may be dead and buried in America, but it's alive and well, resurfacing in Australia where it's once again plying its trade, probably under new management. 'I currently (but not for long) reside at a student dormitory... in Brisbane, Australia,' says a p2pnet reader, continuing: 'Yesterday I got called into the Managers office because the network manager had been contacted by MediaSentry and emailed one of the generic copyright infringement emails as a result of me downloading Angels and Demons. Now instead of studying for my exams and working on my final assignments I must take time to find a place to live before the 29th of May (2009).'"
Related Stories
[+]
MediaSentry & RIAA Expert Under Attack 273 comments
NewYorkCountryLawyer writes "Jammie Thomas, the defendant in Duluth, Minnesota, RIAA case Capitol Records v. Thomas, has served her expert witness's report. The 30-page document (PDF), prepared by Prof. Yongdae Kim of the Computer Science Department of the University of Minnesota, attacks the reports and testimony of Prof. Doug Jacobson, the RIAA's expert, and the work of the RIAA's investigator, Safenet (formerly known as MediaSentry). Among other things, Dr. Kim termed MediaSentry's methods 'highly suspect,' debunked Dr. Jacobson's 'the internet is like a post office' analogy, explained in detail how FastTrack works, explored a sampling of the types of attacks to which the defendant's computer may have been subjected, accused Jacobson of making 'numerous misstatements,' and concluded that 'there is not one but numerous possible explanations for the evidence presented during this trial. Throughout the report I demonstrate possibilities not considered by the plaintiff's expert witness in his evaluation of the evidence...' Additionally, he concluded, 'MediaSentry has a strong record of mistakes when claiming that particular IP addresses were the origins of copyright infringement. Their lack of transparency, lack of external review, and evidence of inadequate error checking procedures [put] into question the authenticity and validity of the log files and screenshots they produced.'"
[+]
Your Rights Online: MediaDefender Buys MediaSentry For $136,000 (Not $20M) 141 comments
newtley writes "SafeNet paid $20 million for MediaSentry in 2005, but has just sold it to rival MediaDefender for a paltry $136,000, with a promise of more later. MediaSentry's new owner says the combination will allow it to 'dramatically expand its effectiveness.' Is it time for an official government inquiry into MediaSentry and the RIAA? A Chicago student said she was planning on killing herself because the RIAA promised her she'd land in court unless she paid almost $10,000 to 'settle' an alleged copyright infringement. She 'couldn't sleep, couldn't study, couldn't live a normal life because of the worry.' The RIAA 'evidence' came from MediaSentry, accused of operating illegally."
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
Angels and Demons (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Angels and Demons (Score:5, Insightful)
Damn, you could at least lose your dormitory for a movie worth watching.
Even worse result:
<RIAA> See? Illegal file sharing is why Angels and Demons did poorly at the box office and got an average rating of 38% [rottentomatoes.com]! It isn't the economy or quality, folks, our formula has never failed therefore it must be the file sharers! </RIAA>
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
BZZZT (Score:5, Informative)
I know almost nothing about Australian law, but in the U.S., downloading a copyrighted work without a license is a copyright violation, and in some cases may be a crime. For civil copyright infringement, the law does not care whether you actually knew you were infringing the copyright. So you absolutely are the one who has to check for this.
I suspect Australian law is similar.
Parent
Re:Angels and Demons (Score:5, Funny)
In my day most people got thrown out of university accommodation for having wild parties and trashing the joint or for dealing drugs.
How things have changed.
Parent
Re:Angels and Demons (Score:5, Insightful)
This is true. Likewise, just because laws can be broken doesn't mean that every crime is a protest.
What Ms Parks did was absolutely, positively, NOT in the same league as what this student did.
To claim so diminishes both Civil Rights and the arguments against Intellectual Property.
There are things in the IP realm to protest, but the 'right' to download Angels and Demons is NOT among them.
Parent
Re:Angels and Demons (Score:5, Funny)
Yeah the illegallity of sharing movies is a gros affront to human dignity. Downloading free movies is exactly like what Rosa Parks did. Shithead.
Maybe if Rosa Parks could download the movie she wanted to watch, she wouldn't get the bus to go to the movies in the first place.
Parent
Re:Angels and Demons (Score:5, Informative)
My wife loses hers soon because the Movie Industry is laying off heavily.
Sorry to hear that, but if you think she's getting laid off because people are downloading what they can't afford to buy (ten dollars for a non-matinee ticket?) then you've had a little too much Kool Aid.
If the actors and executives voluntarily took a pay cut and redistributed the wealth a little bit so people could keep their jobs and possibly float the studios through this recession, I wouldn't see the film industry as being ridiculously top-heavy and greedy. I might even give some credence to the MPAA screaming "We're getting robbed blind!" every time they get near a reporter.
For the record, I'm not trying to be an apologist for people who choose to download copyrighted material, but at the same time I don't make any excuses for the business model the entertainment industry is fighting tooth and nail to preserve either.
Something to think about.
Parent
Re:Angels and Demons (Score:4, Insightful)
Parent
Re:Angels and Demons (Score:5, Insightful)
I believe that a commons, a public library by and for everyone is a better model for creation and distribution of content than one that is limited by an unnatural monopoly. That everyone stands on the shoulders of giants and no man is an island of information.
The student that got kicked out of their dorm is not Rosa Parks. They are likely not oppressed in their day to day lives, just the victim of an IP scheme that has outlived it's usefulness.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
So you think that movie studios should spend $100+million on a movie and then give it away? They may not be handling the situation well, but that doesn't mean it's right to steal their content.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Angels and Demons (Score:5, Informative)
You need to look up how slashdot's moderation system works before you make dumb comments. It takes three moderators to make a comment +5. I'm pretty sure there are more than three users of slashdot other than yourself.
After you educate yourself on how the moderation system works, you may continue to make dumb comments.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Sure it's an analogy, or simile, but that doesn't make it a good one. Sorry, but comparing some kid wanting to watch Angels and Demons for free to a Civil Rights leader taking a stand against legalized overt racism is complete BS.
A better analogy (simile) would be something like :comparing Rosa Parks to file sharers is like comparing apples to tentacle rape.
Not that sympathetic (Score:4, Insightful)
You chose to break the law and were punished for it.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
He choose to break the RIAA rules and got judged in a kangaroo court.
Or was that extortion?
Re:Not that sympathetic (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't really see too much room for debate when the accused states the matter as simply as "...a result of me downloading Angels and Demons". I don't read this and feel that the person is genuinely feeling remorse for what was done, only for getting caught.
Parent
Re:Not that sympathetic (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:Not that sympathetic (Score:5, Interesting)
It seems he got a damn fast judgement. And a damn fast judgement done by a private company.
Does anyone remember 'Judge Dredd'? 'I am the law!!!'
Parent
Re:Not that sympathetic (Score:5, Insightful)
+1 on this sentiment.
He was punished based on an accusation, not on being found guilty.. that's skipping over an incredibly vital step in the justice system.
Really that's only a small step away from how 'justice' was administered during the 'Dark Ages'. I thought we had left that behind us, but apparently having lawyers and money means you don't have to bother with such pesky details anymore. More so because we're not talking of a fine or something small, but of evicting someone!
Oh while we're at it: What if someone accused you of having *something* illegal on your computer, be it a non licensed picture, an bit of software you didn't obtain legally, or some content you've downloaded. Would you be so happy to instantly loose your home without any independent parties being involved in judging what's true and appropriate ?
Parent
Re:Not that sympathetic (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:Not that sympathetic (Score:5, Interesting)
Yes, downloading movies should be illegal, but why are the charges so incredibly much more than shoplifting the DVD out of a store? If he'd done that, he'd probably still have his dorm room.
Parent
Re:Not that sympathetic (Score:5, Insightful)
How do you people know he didn't get due process? How can you even assume that? Considering the fact that he confessed to this on a public website, I'm thinking his conversation with the manager went something like this:
Manager: Hey, kid. I got this letter here from a company called MediaSentry claiming that they traced a download of Angels and Demons to your PC. Is that true?
Kid: Yes.
Manager: GTFO.
That's due process, right there. The kid decided to use his study time to search for, download, and presumably watch a movie which he wasn't entitled to download, and now he's crying because he has to use his study time to find a new place to live.
The only thing newsworthy about this story is the fact that MediaSentry is operating in Australia, the kid who got what he deserved is not the story.
Parent
Re:Not that sympathetic (Score:4, Funny)
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Not that sympathetic (Score:4, Interesting)
While that is true... He really would have got much more sympathy, even on /., if he had the brains to write:
"the network manager had been contacted by MediaSentry and emailed one of the generic copyright infringement emails as a result of me (allegedly) downloading Angels and Demons."
Honestly, students today... what is education coming to? Seems too easy to get into Uni these days. Innocent until proven guilty, but if you are admitting your guilt, then there's a good chance you are. He would have had a reasonable grounds for fighting this if he'd denied any wrong doing and shifted the burden of proof. Not very smart not to.
Parent
Culturally a little differnt (Score:4, Interesting)
Except, culturally, things work a little differently here. Or, at least they used to.
When you do something wrong, you own up to it. You admit your mistake. To deny you did something that you did actually do is seen as cowardice.
It goes back to the playground rules when you were at school.
But the times, they are a changing. More often, people are choosing to get a lawyer (goon) and hide behind them and make up bullshit lines instead of owning up and admitting what they did was wrong.
The innocent until proven guilty line only works for me when the accused is actually innocent. The guy in the story was just being a non coward.
Parent
Re:Not that sympathetic (Score:5, Informative)
Notice that even in the case of an actual criminal activity, police will take many variables in context before to punish.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
That was the result of a contract he willingly entered into between himself and the university about behaviour. He admits he did as described in the letter, and as a result, the university is asking him to leave the dorms.
Should have considered, perhaps, that they might actually have desired and expected that he adhere to the contract that he as an adult signed.
This is fascinating. (Score:4, Interesting)
I'm going to pretend I have no opinion in this post and instead make a "meta-comment:"
What I find fascinating is that, just a year ago, an overwhelming majority of Slashdot readers would have defended this student, written posts to the effect that it is justifiable to download copyrighted work, made angry statements about the MP/RI-AA, and the like. Now, I see many more posts (and story tags -- currently "righttosteal") like yours. Sure, the old pro-pirate posts are still around -- they are probably even still the majority -- but I think that the percentage is lower. I wonder if this means that attitudes are changing, and whether this is due at all to the RIAA's campaign.
Parent
Punishment does not fit the 'crime' (Score:5, Insightful)
I put crime in quotes, because I believe it's only a civil infraction (although, I don't know much about Australian copyright law). In any case, getting kicked out of a dorm room for one 'count' of copyright infringement seems a little harsh, no? I mean, they could have started by just cutting his Internet access for a couple days or a week or something.
I mean, I really fail to see how it is even *legal* to kick someone out of a dorm room/apartment/etc for copyright infringement. Don't you guys have any tennants' rights laws in Australia?
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Millions of people break the law every day; this particular issue of law, specifically. Copyright infringement. Why do all of those people deserve no punishment at all, while this guy deserves to lose his home?
My issue is not that he should be allowed to do what he did, but that the punishment is:
a) Extremely excessive, even for a habitual, repeat offender. We allow rapists to keep their homes (and even provide them with a new one!); is this worse than rape?
b) Extremely sporatically enforced. Would you supp
Re:Not that sympathetic (Score:4, Insightful)
You chose to break the law and were punished for it.
As opposed to the people that break unjust laws and were punished for it?
I mean Aung San Suu Kyi [bbc.co.uk] has my sympathy even though she has indeed broke the "law" of her nation. She's probably going to suffer a long time because it.
I'm not saying that what the file sharer did in anywhere in comparison with what she is trying to accomplish in Burma, but make a blanket statement that because you break a law means you don't get sympathy is foolish indeed.
Hell. Legally, the American Revolutions broke the law when they revolted.
Remember...
Sometimes following a law is not always the right thing to do because sometimes a law is written in an unethical or immoral way.
Parent
Boo hoo.... (Score:4, Insightful)
"Now instead of studying for my exams and working on my final assignments I must take time to find a place to live before the 29th of May (2009).'""
Wah?
I mean come on, you're paying the price for doing what you knew would get in hot water at school. you DID read the acceptable use policy before you signed it right?
Re:Boo hoo.... (Score:5, Insightful)
you DID read the acceptable use policy before you signed it right?
He must have missed the part in the AUP where it said dorm management would evict you for violating network policies based on the accusation of a private third party.
Seriously, WTF /. Half the comments are along the lines of "you deserve this." Sure, he was downloading infringing material and violating the AUP - cut off his internet access. But throwing someone out of a dorm?
Hint: what's to stop a creative student who is pissed at someone from spoofing an e-mail from MediaSentry to the management, and having someone else thrown out?
The real ire should be directed at the management for throwing someone out of housing for violating network policies. What next - run an open access point, and you get expelled? Download a song, and your landlord throws you out of your apartment?
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I hate to go all Les Miserables on people but he did steal the loaf of bread and he readily admits it.
If you've read Les Mis, you'll remember that Jean Valjean is thrown in prison for five years after stealing a loaf of bread. I.e., an unreasonable penalty for a crime that he did commit. So yeah, your analogy is more apt than you seem to realize :-)
It's true that we only have his half of the story. On the other hand, I have a really hard time concocting any other side of the story that would warrant throwing someone out of housing for violating network policies. If he came crying to /. about how his network
Due Process (Score:5, Insightful)
"Now instead of studying for my exams and working on my final assignments I must take time to find a place to live before the 29th of May (2009).'""
Wah?
I mean come on, you're paying the price for doing what you knew would get in hot water at school. you DID read the acceptable use policy before you signed it right?
Um ... where's the due process. A third party, which has been discredited in another country and fired by the copyright cartels there because their ability to track offenders has been so abysmal and inaccurate, has made an accusation. One that, based on their track record in the United States, should be taken with a mountain of salt.
Based on that accusation, someone has been evicted from their home at a time when they should be studying for exams. As far as I can tell, there's been no disciplinary due process, no hearings, no opportunities for appeal, just a summary eviction with no opportunity for the student to put their case forward. Maybe s/he is guilty. Maybe his/her roommate is a prick and used his equipment to do something stupid so they wouldn't pay the price. Maybe someone else did it entirely, and spoofed his IP address. Or maybe, like in so many cases in the US that the company had to close their doors, no one in the dorm was involved at all, and they're barking up the wrong tree completely.
Doesn't matter. Summary punishment has been meted out, on the barest of accusations. That is a problem, the student's guilt or innocence not withstanding, and if I were considering sending a kid to university, that's one school I would avoid quite possibly wasting my hard earned money on.
Parent
Seriously - losing your housing is appropriate (Score:4, Interesting)
Do you *seriously* contend that losing your housing with like 2 weeks' notice or something ridiculous like that is a fitting response to the activity in question? I totally have sympathy for this guy. I don't see why anyone should lose their housing over copyright infringement. I mean, just disable his ethernet ports for a week or something. I fail to see how kicking someone out of the building with short notice is an appropriate response for minor copyright infringement.
Parent
Oy (Score:3, Insightful)
"Now instead of studying for my exams and working on my final assignments "
It seems to me that if you were really concerned about studying, you'd have done it before downloading Angels & Demons.
Stupid replies ignoring the point. (Score:5, Insightful)
As expected, there are a large number of replies by people who didn't even bother to read the summary. (Or, have poor reading comprehension, or even both, I guess.)
The submitter is not the same as the student.
Anyway, the point is, MediaSentry is still "alive", and still sending out automated messages.
Now it seems that the student admitted to downloading the file ("as a result of me downloading Angels and Demons"), which sort of screws over any real complaint they may have had.
Personally, I think it's disgusting that the manager paid any attention to the "generic copyright infringement email" at all. Seriously, if I were in that situation, I would delete the email and forget about it.
I wonder, who is MediaSentry acting for in this situation? Does that company know that MediaSentry is doing this? Do MediaSentry have the right to sue on behalf of that company?
And, is MediaSentry keeping track of these emails and watching for responses?
let the punishment fit the crime (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:let the punishment fit the crime (Score:5, Insightful)
No, not in this case. If the dorm manager had evicted him for scratching the paint, it's a direct issue betwene the manager and the student. This, on the other hand, is the student bringing issues down on the dorm via legal issues with a third party. It looks like the dorm doesn't want to deal with fighting legal battles that aren't it's problem. The student likely signed an acceptable use policy, and so long as the student admitted fault or there was acceptable level of evidence, there shouldn't be a problem. The only issue would be blindly evicting based on every letter sent to the dorm management. It doesn't look like that's the case given the admission of downloading the film.
Parent
Admit stuff much? (Score:3, Insightful)
Haven't you learned anything? ..."
Your correct phrase should be: "... me allegedly downloading
This doesn't sound like MediaSentry's style (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Exactly what is the student's complaint?
If he did break the law, he needs to accept the consequences. If he didn't break the law, he should rebut the accusation.
I believe his complaint is that, for stealing ~$10 worth of books, he is now being punished by losing his house and possibly an academic year.
Some of us still believe that crime and punishment need to be in balance somehow, and that simply isn't the case here.
Re:What's the problem? (Score:4, Insightful)
If he did break the law, he needs to accept the consequences. If he didn't break the law, he should rebut the accusation.
Let me help you understand: the problem is that the consequences are inappropriate to the conduct. Your line of reasoning would have everyone accept whatever consequences are in place, no matter how draconian.
There, now, that wasn't so hard, was it?
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
They will have plenty of customers left. There are millions of people who are willing to pay money to watch movies; which took a lot of time and money to create.
Re:What's the problem? (Score:4, Insightful)
Seems there's more to it, I suspect.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
They sent an email informing the college as owners of the IP address of the infringement. He admitted to it, and while looking over the agreement for use of his dorm, which
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
And if you want to call that hypocritical, it's not: sure, I procrastinated too, but it was a stupid thing to do: t