MPAA Caught Uploading Fake Torrents 579
An anonymous reader writes "The MPAA and other anti-piracy watchdogs have been caught trapping people into downloading fake torrents, so they can collect IP addresses, and send copyright infringement letters to ISPs. The battle between P2P networks and copyright holders seems to be a never ending battle. It will be interesting to see how much the anti-piracy groups practices change once they begin begin selling movies and TV shows legally on bittorrent.com."
Re:ZOMG!! (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:ZOMG!! (Score:3, Insightful)
But if the MPAA was distributing them... (Score:5, Insightful)
...then either it wasn't copyright infringment, or the MPAA was infringing too! The only legitimate way for the MPAA to "catch" people committing copyright infringement would be to observe the swarm without uploading anything itself.
So... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:ZOMG!! (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:ZOMG!! (Score:5, Insightful)
The MPAA still holds the copyright on the sequence of bytes it did upload... but it also gave permission to copy by the act of uploading it! (This is necessarily the case, because otherwise I could just as easily say that you were infringing my copyright by reading this post.)
what does this accomplish? (Score:5, Insightful)
Or they're dummy files, which means you can go ahead and grab it since there's no copywritten content shifting hands.
Re:ZOMG!! (Score:5, Insightful)
The MPAA didn't upload any copyrighted material. They're seeding garbage files that are labeled as actual content and collecting IPs.
Re:So... (Score:5, Insightful)
Though I'd wager it could be kinda hard (provided you find a judge that isn't yet caught up in anti-piracy bubbles) to argue that this isn't a setup, that they didn't want to play agent provocateur. Is that legal in the US?
Re:ZOMG!! (Score:5, Insightful)
2. If you put your own car out by the road with a "free car" sign on it, you can't accuse someone who takes it of GTA.
3. If the cops actually plant a "fake car" like you describe, the perpetrator is not guilty of Grand Theft Auto, as no car has been taken.
Re:ZOMG!! (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:ZOMG!! (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:ZOMG!! (Score:5, Insightful)
No, unauhtorized distribution is a requirement for copyright infringement to be deemed a criminal matter, but the law is called copyright, not distribution right. The right to distribute is a corallary right of the right to copy, since the former depends on the latter.
If you are the legitimate owner of the physical media you may distribute at will. You do not need any special authorization, the person who created it did. CD stores are not licensed, they just buy "stuff," property, and resell it.
So what exactly are they claiming when they "notify" the ISPs?
That their copyright has been violated, because it has. The downloader is making a copy, without authorization. Yes, it's a trivial civil offense. That isn't at all the same thing as saying it isn't an offense.
KFG
Re:hmm (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:well than my next point is.... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:ZOMG!! (Score:5, Insightful)
Grr, Copyright Infringement ISN'T THEFT!
REPEAT AFTER ME!
Copyright Infringement ISN'T THEFT!
It would be more like the cops planting a fake car and then someone copying the design of the fake car, so they could catch people copying their design.
Re:If the MPAA uploads to you then it is legal (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:ZOMG!! (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:ZOMG!! (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:If the MPAA uploads to you then it is legal (Score:4, Insightful)
I think you are missing his/her point. The MPAA can't do anything to these people. The ISPs don't have to release any information to them either.
The MPAA is just trying to scare people.
Any how, most people trade content now by hand. Kids trade CDs and DVDs full of content all day at school. Adults trade at the office or gym. People are using one-time-use heavy encryption and sending stuff through the mail back and forth with Europe, South America, etc.
The MPAA is loosing the battle.
Besides, at some point the Indie labels will all just distribute in the clear as a marketing gimmick to try to get a leg up on the biggies. At some point one or two of them will stick. The economy will change.
Soliciting != doing (Score:4, Insightful)
Many crimes however require that you actually do something. I beleive that copyright infringement is like that.
Re:ZOMG!! (Score:3, Insightful)
IP-holders don't think international (Score:4, Insightful)
There's no legal possibilty to obtain those shows legally here. Of course I could wait until they dub it and release it here but this usually takes up one year. Of course with crappy dubbing and no chance of getting the english voice track due to increased cost in licensing - even on pay-tv. Or wait even longer for the DVD release.
So the only way to obtain those shows is via bittorrent. I know several ppl who do that so there's definitely a market there... but noone is stepping in.
I know from a legal standpoint I should just do other stuff instead of watching pirated TV shows, but still its quite strange: The mechanisms of the free market somehow don't work here.
Hmmm... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:ZOMG!! (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:This just sound like scaremongering (Score:3, Insightful)
It isn't always true, but if someone downloads an illegal copy of Miami Vice, that same person has probably downloaded other pirated movies. The MPAA uses the fake torrents to find out who is downloading movies and uses that information as leverage against ISPs. The legality of the MPAA's (or whoever is doing this) actions aren't really relavent in this case because this isn't being taken to court.
Or at least that's how I read the article.
Re:ZOMG!! (Score:4, Insightful)
You'd better hope you're wrong, because otherwise you owe me (pinky to mouth) one million dollars for having illegally downloaded and read my post! I never explicitly gave you permission to view it, just as the MPAA didn't give people explicit permission to download its torrent. I merely made it available, and you just assumed that it constituted permission. So ha ha, sucker -- you're screwed now!
Now, do you realize how stupid that argument would be? I mean, I realize that copyright law is fucked up, but it's got to give way to common sense sometime!
Re:But if the MPAA was distributing them... (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:that's why there are courts, juries etc (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:is that even legal? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:ZOMG!! (Score:3, Insightful)
Digg has gotten even worse. It's a pro-piracy haven where they even actively spread piracy tips to help others steal artists' stuff.
Re:ZOMG!! (Score:3, Insightful)
Then you will be attempting to charge me for the theft of money which didn't even exist in the first place?!
And you wont be charging me with the theft of a paper bag, because AFAIK the torrent index file isn't physically the copywrited material in dispute.
and now my brain hurts!
Re:that's why there are courts, juries etc (Score:3, Insightful)
That's why you should meet them in a bar, or another age-restricted venue. They'd have a hell of a time trying to prove you were trying to pick up on 13-year-olds in a bar.
Re:that's why there are courts, juries etc (Score:3, Insightful)
Then you are an adult in need of supervision.
After all, you generally need a credit card to get internet service, and you generally need to be 18 to get a CC
Somewhat behind the times, aren't we?
Re:But if the MPAA was distributing them... (Score:4, Insightful)
The only catch is that I could say "You can have a free copy, but you may not redistribute." Since all downloaders of a torrent are also uploaders, you'd be violating the redistribution clause. I highly doubt, however, that any such wording was present in the torrent (although it is possible to add comments). Also, intentionally using a distribution mechanism which by default makes people distributors would seem to be a de facto exception to the clause since you knew, or should have known, that redistribution would occur through your actions.
Re:ZOMG!! (Score:3, Insightful)
I presume you mean a copy of the protected something and not the copyright.
. .
I await with bated breath your argument for financial loss in getting nothing for nothing. Nevermind the fact that they promised you nothing, you assumed.
"Would you like this peanut butter jar?"
"Shit yeah! I'm hungry. Hey! There's no peanut butter in here. What's the deal?"
"Dude, is it a jar? Does it say "peanut butter" on the label? It's a peanut butter jar. Now fuck off."
KFG
Re:ZOMG!! (Score:2, Insightful)
No? You don't have an *ENTIRE* copy floating around your dvd player?
Re:is that even legal? (Score:2, Insightful)
No, the law doesn't work that way.
You can't cause someone to cause harm to yourself on purpose and then sue someone for it, even if such harm is specifically laid out in the law as a tort. Even if it's illegal to have an open manhold without a fence, and that if someone falls in they get a lot of money, that doesn't mean I can delibrately walk up to it, 'fall' in, and sue. Nor can you stand behind buses and hope you get hit as they lurch into motion.
In fact, tort law requires that you take reasonable steps to prevent harm to yourself, as long as they aren't too onerous. I.e., you have to inform them they are harming you, if you suspect they don't know. Like you can't sue someone for twenty years of second-hand smoke because they smoked in the apartment below you and it went through their ceiling if you have not, at any point, told them this was happening. The courts frown on anything that makes it look like either the harm wasn't that bad, or, alternately, you were 'saving up' harm to sue over.
So, if they feel that way about various forms of inaction, you can imagine how they feel about it if you go around actively taking actions that cause 'harm' to yourself. If you try to sue over that in court, you will be thrown out. There's probably some fancy latin word for this, but it simply does not fly.
Ergo, if the MPAA is handing out torrents, either of actual movies or two-hour copyrighted blank screens, and they understand how bittorrent work, by everyone uploading, they cannot sue anyone if that, in fact, happens, even if the law explicitly says otherwise, because tort law as a whole completely excludes 'harm you deliberately caused other people to cause to yourself'.
That said, they've managed to pass criminal copyright law recently, so you could in violation of that. Of course, if you are, the MPAA has just committed a crime by entering into a general criminal conspiracy with you!
ie. It's just a FUD campaign. (Score:5, Insightful)
No RIAA case has ever gone to trial, either they scare the defendants into handing over some money or they drop the case when real lawyers get involved.
The only important thing is that ISPs get accustomed to handing over user account details and that the press keeps on reporting that people are landing in court because they downloaded stuff.
i.e. It's a FUD campaign.
Re:ZOMG!! (Score:5, Insightful)
The MPAA are sitting on their porch with a large bag labelled "Free Money, Come & Get Some" so you go over and ask them for some. They give you something which looks like money until you've got a bit further down the road when you realise it's only fake money.
The MPAA then follow you down the road back to your house and call the police asking them to charge you with stealing their money except rather than demanding just the money they pretended to give you back to you they ask for 100 dollars back for every dollar you didn't get because if you had have got it then you might have given it to anyone of your 100 friends. If you had it, which you didn't because the money was fake.
I hope that makes the situation crystal clear !
Re:ZOMG!! (Score:5, Insightful)
Digg has gotten even worse. It's a pro-piracy haven where they even actively spread piracy tips to help others steal artists' stuff.
It's akin to a shop setting up a bin somewhere labeled "free samples", and then siccing the cops on those unsuspecting customers who "steal" from that bin...
Re:If the MPAA uploads to you then it is legal (Score:4, Insightful)
No, this MPAA-sponsored file sharing isn't about scaring people or about lawsuits. They are just increasing the amount of filesharing going on, so that they can up their estimate of lost annual revenues to $60 billion.
Re:ZOMG!! (Score:3, Insightful)
The MPAA has disguises on and carries a big bag that says "free money (caution: this money may not be entirely legal to possess)." You take some, which is fake, and walk home. They follow you home and sue you for possession of stolen or counterfeit money. They use the power of subpoena to look around your house until they find the stolen or counterfeit money you got from somewhere else.
This isn't about finding people who download the fake torrents. As I've pointed out elsewhere, this is about identifying people who are downloading movies, suing them, and then finding out which movies they successfully downloaded.