UK Law Enforcement Starts Seizing Music Blogs

Grumbleduke writes "From Dajaz1 (a site that is no stranger to unjustified copyright takedowns) we learn that the popular R&B website rnbxclusive.com (warning: threatening message on site) has allegedly been seized by the Serious Organized Crime Agency, a UK law enforcement agency, and its operators arrested on fraud charges. Not only does the replacement message contain a number of factually dubious claims, it also shows the visitor's IP address, browser and operating system, and threatens to track and monitor them. At a time when copyright lobby groups are strongly pushing for even greater powers through laws such as SOPA and ACTA, one is left wondering why they think they need them, when police can shut down websites such as this at will."

Thanks SOCA

[viperidaenz]

for assuming you have jurisdiction in my country.

"About SOCA"

SOCA tackles serious organised crime that affects the UK and our citizens. This includes Class A drugs, people smuggling and human trafficking, major gun crime, fraud, computer crime and money laundering. and downloading american music

ftfy.

Serious Organized Crime Agency

[microbee]

One wonders what that means: is it an agency against serious organized crime, or is one to commit the crime itself?

Looks Fake

[Olipro]

whois indicates the original owner still controls the domain, the server itself is Rackspace owned whereas SOCA's own website is run themselves via Connect Internet Solutions Ltd. - throw in the fact that SOCA haven't made any announcement or press release regarding the alleged takedown and the whole thing looks like a setup, I call shenanigans.

Re:Darknets

[Penguinisto]

A nice thought, but the problem lies in the fact that it isn't just a single generation soaked with this particular poison.

If it were just a matter of waiting until Orrin Hatch died off, that would be easy. OTOH, the MPAA and RIAA likely employs an awful lot of 30-somethings, as well as a lot of duped people out there who swallowed their propaganda... and that's going to take at least half a century before they die off.

I'm afraid we're stuck with either fighting, or watching the whole thing get strangled.

There is no reliable means or method to hide anymore - no matter how many TOR nodes you traversed to get your packets here. If they cannot reach you now, they will find ways to insure that they can (a heavily-modified and enforced TPM on all devices, anyone?)

Better to fight them now than suffer under their burdens later.

It is my understanding...

[fuzzyfuzzyfungus]

I get the impression that, no matter how rosy the state of the industry or how sweeping the existing state powers, the push for harsher 'anti-piracy' legislation will continue until such time as the primary task of the world's security forces will be the summary execution of those suspected to be guilty of insufficient music purchase during the preceding fiscal year.

Re:Thanks SOCA

[jamstar7]

Like that ever stopped the MAFIAA before. Get accused of downloading any American 'intellectual property' anywhere on the planet and expect to get put on a 'deport to the US please' list forwarded to your local national government.

I'm thinkin mebbe we oughta move offplanet, make it more expensive to come after us...

Re:Darknets

[Nethemas the Great]

You're not weird. Most people believe artist should be compensated for their work. The trouble is the MPAA/RIAA, their ilk and their members do not.

Re:Darknets

[wbr1]

You'r not strange at all. I beleive artists should be paid. However, as the music industry stand most get paid a pittance while corps rake in huge money and spend it on ways to make more with lobbying, and pay execs self congratulatory fortunes. The record company model made far more sense when tney had to fund expensive studios, and actually manufacture a physical product. Now it has morphed into simple greed, and inertia and money keep it moving.

False dichotomy

[Anonymous Coward]

Opposing artificial scarcity is not the same thing as preventing artists from being paid for their work. It just means the artists need to adapt their business model to one that better monetizes the production of an abundant good. Those who think this can't be done are either lying or intentionally ignorant.

Re:Darknets

[nbauman]

It wasn't just expensive studios and physical product.

They used to spend a lot of money developing new talent and marketing. They might pay an upcoming star $100,000 for a year while they wait for her to take off (if ever). Living expenses, travel, ads in Variety and Rolling Stone, and cocaine are expensive.

I'm not sure whether these were productive expenses or whether they were just the cost of positioning themselves on the top in a competitive market. *Somebody* is going to have a hit, whether it's a corporate-promoted work or not. We had music before the days of big corporations, and we'll still have music if they go.

Surely it's a hoax?

[dnewt]

I have a strong suspicion this is a hoax. The wording just doesn't seem like something SOCA, or any other law enforcement agency would say in this situation. For a start, the statement "stolen from the artists" suggests they're already guilty. That's for a jury to decide. The statement regarding "damaged careers" really doesn't seem like something SOCA would say. It's not SOCA's place to say something like that, and strongly doubt they ever would. The link to pro-music.org seems to be pushing the agenda of the music business too. Why would SOCA endorse what is effectively a campaign to push the music industry's agenda? I'm really not convinced.

Indicentally, The Register has picked up the story [theregister.co.uk]. I hope they checked their facts first.

Re:Darknets

[EdIII]

I agree that we need to fight now. Darknets would be a step towards that.

TOR does reliably hide people. I have seen white papers on trying to analyze TOR networks, but I am not convinced that it would work on a large scale. Too many nodes to monitor. TOR is by no means the most advanced technology out there. You have Freenet and other Darknets being developed as we speak.

The real war will be stepping up with rampant civil disobedience on enforced TPM. Refuse to purchase the devices, go to underground markets to get your equipment, etc.

That is the end game, the final battlefield. Encryption. All roads lead to it. It will either be controlled, which means freedom died, or it will remain uncontrolled, and enable freedom to survive.

Re:Darknets

[fatman22]

"We do our utmost to provide the public with the best possible service, and to act professionally and courteously at all times."

I beg to disagree with you. Have you read the nonsense on that replacement web page?

"... were stolen from the artists" - nothing was stolen. The authors and publishers still have possession of their property. They were only deprived of profits they had not yet earned. That is not a proper thing to do, but it is also not stealing. Change the text to read "were being distributed without the owners' permission".

"As a result of ... young, emerging artists may have had their careers damaged. If you have ... you will have damaged the future of the music industry." - The publishers have done far more to ruin or hinder the careers of young emerging artists than any illegal downloaders could have caused. Aim your sites in the right direction please.

Most of the Internet community already understand this. You apparently do not or do not want to. Do your credibility a favor and reword that page.

Time to take their toys away

[mykos]

If people can't enforce copyright without rushing headlong into a police state, I think we should take away that privilege of copyright which society has afforded them. And this isn't some extreme slippery slope argument. We are on that slippery slope and we are sliding down it right now.

I'm sure there are defeatist pedants who will come along and say "Good luck taking it away! They're too powerful and they have too much money!", but you have to start somewhere. And having that attitude means they have one less person to fight.

Re:Looks Fake

[Dan541]

Wow, from Ubuntu it now tells me Firefox 7.0.1 on UNIX

It got the browser right however saying "UNIX" for operating system is far more inaccurate than saying "WinNT" for Windows 7.

Re:Darknets

[TapeCutter]

I'm a pissed-off American

Is there any other kind these days?

Re:Darknets

[Znork]

No. The easiest way to demonstrate why is to examine what happens to the copies when copyright expires. There is no transfer of property at that point. The copies are and have always been the property of their respective possessor.

The monopoly right is more like a taxation right on the act of copying.

Calling it 'property' and trying to think about it as 'property' inevitably muddies your thinking. Which was the whole point of trying to call it 'property' in the first place.

Re:Darknets

[AmiMoJo]

I'm drafting a similar complain, but will focus on the blatant lies and scaremongering.

They say you can get 10 years for downloading music. That is a lie. It is copyright infringement, a civil matter, no jail time possible unless you start doing it on a commercial scale for profit. They say they can identify and track you from an IP address. That is also a lie, IP addresses do not identify individuals, computers or even internet connections.

They also make a big deal out of how the operators were arrested for fraud. Arrested, not even charged yet? Convicted? Maybe they are innocent. I might as well shout from the rooftops about how SOCA are all murderers and terrorists. Accusations are meaningless until proven in court and a law enforcement agency, of all people, should not try to make out otherwise.