MPAA Looks to Sniff Internet2 Traffic for Sharers 485
Danathar writes "It looks like the MPAA is pretty scared that Internet2 users are able to trade movies at high speed without them being able to know what's being traded, since you have to be a member of the Internet2 network to have a connection. As a result, they are asking to become a member."
Dear MPAA, (Score:5, Funny)
Love,
Internet2
Re:Dear MPAA, (Score:4, Funny)
Prepare to be sued for obstruction of justice.
Love, MPAA
Re:Dear MPAA, (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Dear MPAA, (Score:3, Funny)
That's what you think.
MPAA
PS: Remind us, how much have we given you in campaign contributions?
Re:Dear MPAA, (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Dear MPAA, (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Dear MPAA, (Score:5, Funny)
They didn't quite hear it the first time.
Then again, they didn't hear us the first time Internet1 laughed in their face of their business model, reached down its throat, cut through its esophagus, pulled out its still-beating heart, seasoned it, grilled it, ate it, shat it back out through a million fileservers, and shoved it back down its still-steaming gullet.
So it's not too surprising they didn't hear it the first time on Internet2.
Re:Dear MPAA, (Score:5, Funny)
Thanks, you've just put me off of downloading music completely. Good job, you've accomplished what the RIAA never could.
I mean, eww.
Re:Dear MPAA, (Score:3, Interesting)
You know, it is funny, because I just started downloading music, and I use the I2HUB thing since I am at Carnegie Mellon, and it is great stuff. It is a shame that I did not get into this illegal stuff earlier. And now, like five days after I started doing it, there is a possibility that I might get sued. Oh, well. I am not addicted yet.
Re:Dear MPAA, (Score:5, Insightful)
This is a world where selfish people are rewarded. Hence, if you download music but then do not share it (i.e. you keep it for yourself) you are not doing anything illegal. It is illegal you (for now) to share, because essentially you are giving the right to somebody to listen to the music, but you are not paying the owner of the copyright. Essentially, you are doing what iTune does, but without authorization.
Napster got burned not because they were supplying the program, but because they were supplying the servers, hence they were helping the infringment. Same difference between supplying a gun and helping somebody to shoot.
Re:Dear MPAA, (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Dear MPAA, (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Dear MPAA, (Score:5, Funny)
Dear MPAA, Here's your answer [floggle.com].
MPAA has obsessive-compulsive disorder (Score:5, Insightful)
The amount of disturbance to the industry caused or even potentially caused by Div-X converting and downloading is so tiny compared to the amount of resources and ill-will generated by their heavy-handed response to this so-called threat that one must come to the conclusion that the MPAA leadership is mentally unbalanced.
They are acting like the people who wash their hands ten times after touching a public door handle. They just aren't being rational.
The NYT Magazine articles mentioned that each DVD sale of $15 brings $9.00 of pure profit to the film studios that they don't have to share with anyone. This is the source of all the profit in the film industry. This is the fuel that is making the current entertainment boom possible.
Hundreds of millions of DVDs are sold each year and billions will be sold in the coming years.
Why are they so obsessed with ten thousand or so people sharing rotgut quality Div-X copies? Especially when each one takes several hours to download?
Even at minimum wage the wages for the amount of time spent downloading a stupid DivX is more than the price of a pristine DVD of the same title.
Nothing about this makes any sense.
It will probably just fade as embarrassment when the MPAA actually examines the real numbers involved and comes to its senses.
Re:MPAA has obsessive-compulsive disorder (Score:5, Funny)
Even at minimum wage the wages for the amount of time spent downloading a stupid DivX is more than the price of a pristine DVD of the same title.
Perhaps you haven't realized this, but computers can be left on while you pursue other activities.
Re:MPAA has obsessive-compulsive disorder (Score:5, Funny)
Re:MPAA has obsessive-compulsive disorder (Score:4, Funny)
It's something that only women can do, so we guys are forced to buy computers to do this for us.
Re:MPAA has obsessive-compulsive disorder (Score:5, Funny)
Other activites?
Like ones that don't involve computers?
You blaspheme!
Re:MPAA has obsessive-compulsive disorder (Score:5, Insightful)
If I didn't have to pay for the same thing 3 times if I liked it, or the 1st time if I didn't, then I wouldn't download movies. I don't like the >2x markup per time you have to buy it, either. How many of you have two copies of LoTR because the directors edition came out? How many times did you see it in the theater. Actually... just add it all up, and write it down on a peice of paper and keep it near your computer. Every time you start to feel guilty about downloading, take a look at how much money you spent on one single movie. Content should only be paid for one time. At least software comes with upgrade pricing. The extensions to neverwinter nights were cheap and seperately purchasable. I didn't have to buy another copy of the game that included the new features.
Re:MPAA has obsessive-compulsive disorder (Score:5, Insightful)
The amount of disturbance to the industry caused or even potentially caused by Div-X converting and downloading is so tiny compared to the amount of resources and ill-will generated by their heavy-handed response to this so-called threat that one must come to the conclusion that the MPAA leadership is mentally unbalanced.
Ten years ago, you could say this about the RIAA. Everyone was on dialup, and it took hours to download a single album. Fast forward to now and you can get a whole album in minutes. In 5 or ten years, Joe Downloader will be able to get movies as fast.
Why are they so obsessed with ten thousand or so people sharing rotgut quality Div-X copies?
I well-ripped XVID or DIVX movie looks almost identical to a DVD at bitrates that allow it to fit onto a CD. They're even being distributed with 5.1 surround sound AC3 audio. If your DIVX movies look "rotgut," you're downloading the wrong ones.
Even at minimum wage the wages for the amount of time spent downloading a stupid DivX is more than the price of a pristine DVD of the same title.
Not true at all. One can search for movies with Kazaa or load a torrent from a web site in the morning, and by the time one returns from work, the download is finsihed, happily awaiting my watchful eyes. Total time invested: 5 minutes. Sure the computer downloaded for hours, but the user can be away doing his own thing.
It will probably just fade as embarrassment when the MPAA actually examines the real numbers involved and comes to its senses.
It's not the numbers they should examine, it's the trends. What is a small problem for them today can blossom into a huge one in a few years.
Don't get me wrong. I think that the MPAA is doing some really terrible things. I don't want to get sued for downloading a movie that I own a license for but is damaged. And I don't think that suing a customer base is a good way to engender good-will. But the consituent corporations of the MPAA are only interested in profit. And intimidating those who use their products without paying for them may actually be a smart strategy to protect those profits. -InsectMuffin
Re:MPAA has obsessive-compulsive disorder (Score:3, Interesting)
Except it's already backfired on them with me. Pers
Re:MPAA has obsessive-compulsive disorder (Score:4, Informative)
What, pray tell, has P2P done to the music industry?
'cause the stuff I've read indicates that it's been a benefit. RIAA likes to bemoan the decline of sales, but it turns out that the decline is less than what one would have expected given the economic downturn; it appears, then, that P2P has actually increased album sales.
Re:MPAA has obsessive-compulsive disorder (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:MPAA has obsessive-compulsive disorder (Score:3, Insightful)
You can *STILL* say it about the RIAA (Score:5, Insightful)
They'd like you to think that they are being so hurt.
But all the studies say otherwise, citing no statistical variance in sales compared to the general economic condition before, during, or after peak Napster use.
The fact is that the "harm" only exists in the feevered dreams of averice fixed firmly in the deluded heads of RIAA executives.
The harm to the MPAA might be higher, as really bad movies dont' get purchased or re-rented. Heck, most people who buy DVDs don't watch them more than once or twice. So if somone downloads a marginal movie, they are less likely to buy/rent it by a wide margin.
Music has a much lower commitment-to-engage than a movie. You can listen to music in your car or on the bus or while you are doing any number of other things. Movies you have to stop and watch.
Since Music is more re-usable the purchase-after-download factor has to be pretty high.
I would think for movies it would be otherwise.
To some extent the MPAA's strongest argument to stop downloading would be to first _GUT_ the RIAA's claims to harm and then show why it's different for movies. Without that infighting the "**AA" effect will damn the MPAA with the RIAA's brush.
Sucks to be them.
Solidarity with shit-covered losers will likely result in you finding yourself covered in shit, think about that MPAA...
Re:You can *STILL* say it about the RIAA (Score:4, Interesting)
Was going to mod you, but then wasn't sure whether you should be a troll, flamebait, insightful or interesting, so thought I'd reply instead. :-)
It may (or may not) only be in those heads, but it's a good bet that they do sincerely believe it.
All the usual kindergarten statistical mistakes frequently get made by both sides in this debate, particularly confusing correlation with causation. However, the RIAA execs can see the same studies as everyone else. Contrary to popular opinion in some parts, they probably didn't get to those positions by being stupid either, so they're going to be well aware of the negative PR value of their legal campaigns, and the costs of all the lawyers' time to push them.
Now, if those execs could see that allowing on-line distribution would really make them more money, or had a negligible effect on sales, they would be promoting it or ignoring it. They are trying to maximise their organisations' profits, and you don't do that by spending who knows how much on legal battles that don't help you, or by annoying significant fractions of your potential customer base without good cause.
Hence, whatever those of you who rip music illegally may choose to believe in order to justify breaking the law, it's a good bet that the RIAA execs really do believe that the illegal song-swapping is hurting their business.
Re:MPAA has obsessive-compulsive disorder (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:MPAA has obsessive-compulsive disorder (Score:5, Informative)
I don't want to get sued for downloading a movie that I own a license for but is damaged.
Sigh. Have you read the copyright act? 17 USC? You don't have any license for the movie. Buying a DVD does not convey any rights to the copyrighted work it contains (17 USC 202). Further, DVDs are sold for private performance only, which is *not* a right exclusively reserved to the copyright holder (see the enumerated list at 17 USC 106). So you neither buy nor need any license in the copyrighted work. And while there may be a statutorily created right for private copying of sound recordings (aka music), as the Audio Home Recording Act has been interpreted (see the space shifting analysis in RIAA v. Diamond), and while computer software may be copied for backup purposes (17 USC 117), there is no carte blanche rule to "back up" by copying, and certainly not by downloading, a motion picture or audio-visual work. No, the motion picture contents of a DVD are not "software" (though the menus may be). See the definition for a "copy" in 17 USC 101. Thanks for playing.
Re:MPAA has obsessive-compulsive disorder (Score:3, Interesting)
Legal info on AllofMP3 [allofmp3.com] and MP3Search [mp3search.ru] says just that - the music is licensed accord
Re:MPAA has obsessive-compulsive disorder (Score:3, Interesting)
If I were making 150% profits on basically nothing (the movie's already been made, its just up to some minimum wagers to keep the DVD presses loaded), I'd be doing everything in my power to protect that business model. $6 for manufacturing, marketing, distributing, and store profits. $9 into the pocket.
Re:MPAA has obsessive-compulsive disorder (Score:3, Funny)
Well done. Have a special gold star!
See! It's shiny! Hell, have two.
Probable situation (Score:4, Insightful)
membership huh...well (Score:4, Funny)
Can you say: "Hell No."? (Score:5, Funny)
Can you say: "Hell No."?
Re:Can you say: "Hell No."? (Score:5, Interesting)
All it's going to do is get a bunch of researchers pissed off to the point where they'll set up honeypots filled with all sorts of mis-named files.
In any battle of wits between the MPAA/RIAA and researchers, it doesn't take much brains to figure out who will win. We're not talking about a bunch of AOL-ing grandmas here.
Re:Can you say: "Hell No."? (Score:3, Interesting)
Have the MPAA, RIAA, or even Nintendo every used conscious thought in these decisions? Nintendo sent a C&D to suicidegirls.com because one of their subscribers wrote that Zelda was his favorite game. They're retarded. A battle of wits does not apply.
Filling up a computer with files pretending to be movies will only cause more headaches for the researchers having to answer to a bunch of C&Ds because their grocery list was saved in a file called "the_matri
Re:Can you say: "Hell No."? (Score:3, Funny)
As soon as you said that I looked up Elf to find out how many hot chicks were in it, and all I found was a picture of some former Saturday Night Live actor. Needless to say I was quite disappointed.
Re:Can you say: "Hell No."? (Score:4, Insightful)
The Unrated version of "American Pie" was much "dirtier" the rated. Standing with a pie held up to your crotch, and laying on the kitchen counter humping a pie are two entirely different things. One version of the scene made the cut, one didn't. When I went to the video store, I could make an informed decision, choosing the rated or unrated version, and getting an appropriate level of bathroom humor and "indecency" from whichever I chose (that'd be the unrated version, Bob).
The "unrated" version of "Charlie's Angels: Full Throttle" (which had plenty of hot chicks, mind you) is a dissappointment. Nothing that I saw would have made it ineligible for a PG-13 rating. Printing "Unrated" across the leather-clad butts of the 3 female stars on the DVD cover would pretty much guarantee additional sales of a mediocre movie, particularly in the male 18-35 demographic. (I won't fall for that trick again!)
"Unrated" has been exploited and reduced to a lame marketing ploy (instead of the powerful marketing tool it originally was), that will ultimately lose any meaning to the consumer. Instead of being a way for studios to push the boundaries by releasing films "as the artist originally intended" without the restrictions of the rating system, its just another lying label to be ignored.
So yes, releasing an unrated version of Elf would be stupid and pointless. That is unless your point was that you could sell a few million more units by misleading the consumer, in which case you'd be right.
Re:Can you say: "Hell No."? (Score:4, Insightful)
If the feds have any money in the project these little scrotum suckers will get their asshole buddies in congress to let them on.
Re:Can you say: "Hell No."? (Score:4, Funny)
If the feds have any money in the project these little scrotum suckers will get their asshole buddies in congress to let them on.
Please don't tarnish our image by comparing us the MPAA and members of Congress!
Thanks,
Scrotum suckers & Asshole buddies Local #415
Re:Can you say: "Hell No."? (Score:5, Insightful)
Damn straight.
MPAA is attempting to throw a bone to the Internet2 community by promising "eventual" research projects. Why should their membership be accepted? Their interest in reaserching bandwidth speed on file transfer frequency can be done without being a member of Internet2. If you're attempting to join a (theoretically) academic Internet, at least have your reaserch proposal ready!
Seriously, I assue that their "negotiations" with Internet2 would likely be one-sided. None of the member institutions would want the MPAA monitoring the network - consider the liability. That's the effective technique MPAA is using to attempt to join - either work with us, let us join, or we'll make your lives hell. Blackmail negotiations.
If the MPAA joins Internet2 and gather potentially unpleasant data, they can use that information to mandate new data standards, new protocols, whatever possible to insure the maintenance of their IP. In other words, they decide the future of the Internet based on protecting copyright. Lovely.
first subpoena! (Score:4, Funny)
This is a true disgrace (Score:5, Informative)
People or "things" like RIAA and MPAA abuse these laws, which were written to help bring progress. They abuse them into filling their coffers with wealth that is meaningless when it does not really help anybody. More so when it happens at the expense of others, and at the expense of progress.
Internet2 is primarily designed for scientists and research organizations, to pool in their resources and create a powerful network to facilitate better research interaction. Experimental particle physics data goes over several gigabytes, cosmic ray measurements are tremendously huge, gene databanks are big -- this is the kind of information that these networks are built for. Sure, some kid may be misusing them, but the percentage of people doing this would be far too less to be of any consequence (it has come down from 30% to 7%).
People like MPAA just will abuse the system, bring in more bureacracy, more rules and more regulations that will hinder how genuine users will use the system. They will wrap it nice and dandy around money and laws, and buy out our corrupt politicians who will dance to the jingle of wealth. And in the progress, they just will affect real people doing real work.
They are dragging everyone to the level of technology that they can control. Rather than adapt to the new technologies and grow with it, they try and exert their control by legal battles and money. Why can't they admit and move on to an era where their policies and principles encourage the technology, rather than deter it?
I sincerely hope that they are not let on board the Internet2. And I sincerely hope that one day our society is rid of parasitic savages of the likes of MPAA and RIAA. They're the scum and a disgrace of our civilization. They are the true deterrents to progress.
Re:This is a true disgrace (Score:5, Insightful)
MPAA "sniffing" is a laughingstock (Score:5, Interesting)
We get complaints every once in a while from the MPAA or their lackeys, claiming that some host on our network is sharing copies of movies -- The Matrix, Harry Potter, Star Wars: Revenge of George Lucas's Crack Pipe ... you name it.
Here's the funny thing: they're all wrong.
Every one of them. Wrong. I have never received an MPAA copyright-violation complaint that even had the slightest chance of being correct.
Here's how I know: We have a ridiculously big IP allocation, several times more than we need. Most IP addresses in our space are not used, and have never been used. Like, say, X.Y.1.1, or X.Y.64.64. And yet it is for addresses just such as these that we get complaints.
As far as I can tell, the cause of it is that shitheads somewhere in the world abuse our IP addresses behind NAT, instead of using RFC1918 private addresses as God intended them to. And just like with SIP or any other protocol that uses IP addresses in the protocol level to name hosts, file-trading protocols leak NAT addresses.
The abused addresses get published onto file-trading networks as places to get files. The MPAA's drones pick up these leads, and -- without checking -- give them full credence, and fire off complaints to us. They do not even bother to ping the host and listen for our router screaming back, "You blithering fool, there's no such host. There isn't even such a network!"
Any network operator who still gives any credence to these complaints is a fool. They are all wrong. Even if I got one for an address that actually had a host on it -- or, at least, had ever had a host on it! -- I expect it would also be wrong.
Every once in a while I get a complaint from these losers on a slow day, when I have some spare time and am feeling bored in the office. So I put on my slowest, laziest "I've been working a cushy, do-nothing public-sector IT management job for years, I don't know my ass from a router" tone of voice and phone up the MPAA lackey whose number's on the complaint.
I'm oh so very concerned. There's a pirate on our network? Is he breaking the law? What's his computer? You know -- what's his computer? Yeah, I mean, his eye pee. How do I connect to his eye pee and prove he's got these files? Do I need kazz-uh to do that? Wait ... can I do that legally, or am I breaking the Constitution? What's a pee-to-pee anyway, is that some kind of sex perversion?
You get the idea. I thoroughly encourage every other research and educational site network operator to do the very same. Waste their time. Get your stupid out. Stall 'em, stymie 'em, but be very concerned that you don't want any of them Internet pirates pirating your Internet. (Or ask if they know where to find hot lesbian porn.) Most important -- keep the stooge on the line; the MPAA is probably paying him hourly.
Re:MPAA "sniffing" is a laughingstock (Score:4, Insightful)
Chain letter that isn't a scam! (Score:3)
"I sued the MPAA in small claims court and got a judgement against them for $$$, and you can too.
Please sue the MPAA in small claims court for your time in responding to meritless claims as its billable value. When they default, collect your money. Once you win a judgement against the MPAA, please make n copies of this letter and send them to other people you know who may have received meritless cla
Re:This is a true disgrace (Score:4, Insightful)
And another thing is that filesharing is awesome only initially on Inet2, when you realize the immense amount of bandwidth at your disposal. You trade your favourite movies/videos or whatever, and then the novelty wears off. And most schools with Inet2 access have quite rigid protocols which prevent filesharing in many ways.
There will always be a small percentage of misuse, and we've all seen how the RIAA and MPAA gather their statistics. That does not give them the right to enter a research network, just for the purpose of suing others.
Re:This is a true disgrace (Score:3, Funny)
"We've been working with Internet2 for a while to explore ways we can take advantage of delivering content at these extremely high speeds, and basically manage illegitimate content distribution at the same time," said Chris Russell, the MPAA's vice president of Internet standards and technology. "Those would go hand in hand."
(emphasis mine)
If you think "managing illegitimate content distribution" is anything other than
Re:This is a true disgrace (Score:5, Insightful)
You know why? Because those file traders are morally right! The point of copyright law is "to promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts," not to allow cartels to force us to pay them for our own culture. Copyright law has become so perverted that it is almost completely unjust, and I have absolutely no problem with violating an unjust law.
I say "almost completely" because some uses of copyright law actually are reasonable. For example, writers, photographers, and (visual) artists still seem to respect fair use, and things like the GPL and Creative Commons are great -- they're exactly what copyright should be used for. I don't advocate copyright infringement against everyone, just those who are blatantly abusing the system.
It's also interesting to note that the Constitution mentions inventors and writers only. Sure, recorded music and movies didn't exist, but composers, painters, and sculpters did -- and strictly speaking, the Constitution should afford them no protection. However, since they obviously get protection now, at least the purpose could be amended to "to promote Culture and the Public Domain" -- it still wouldn't be "to allow anybody who creates anything to have a monopoly on it for ever more."
Re:This is a true disgrace (Score:5, Informative)
On the other hand, "The Congress shall have Power... To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries" specifically states something that the government can do -- it has the power to give writers and inventors the exclusive rights to their writings and discoveries (respectively). Furthermore, the Tenth Amendment states "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." Since the Constitution doesn't mention movies and music they are therefore not delegated to the United States, so they must not be protected by federal copyright law.
Re:This is a true disgrace (Score:4, Insightful)
The MPAA will add a bureaucratic strain and have no legitimate use for the network. This is a research network being used for legitimate purposes and they have better things to do than the kind of inane crap this will lead to.
I've worked at small ISPs, I've owned small ISPs, I've worked at large ISPs, large network providers, and so on in many different jobs, so I've seen the change in things from 1995 to the present - there are very real costs to network management that are associated with the C&D letters that IP owners feel free to spam all over since the DMCA and I think it is unreasonable for everyone else to bear that cost.
Re:This is a true disgrace (Score:4, Insightful)
That is what pisses me off. Theirs is the exact kind of mentality that make adoption of new technology hard.
They're ruled by old men in suits who know nor care a damn about technology or progress - they only care about how best they can control it to their benefit. P2P is here to stay, and the sooner the **AA's realize it, the better.
Re:This is a true disgrace (Score:5, Interesting)
Why? Because as the consumer, I've the right to choose what I like, before buying. And the new medium lets me exercise that right - to see if the content is worth buying.
If it's not, I simply do not buy it. That is why it hurts the **AAs - they cannot shove any jackshit down anybody's throat, without a choice.
I download 20 songs off an album, and realize that there is just ONE good song in that album. Why should I pay $25 for that one song? Instead, I'll just get it off iMusic. If it's not available, I'll just keep that one song that I like.
There are some bands, of which I own _every_ single album. Why? Because they make good music, and I would not want to cheat them.
Remember - give the consumer good quality and do not try to rip them off. And they will be happy to help out the artists.
Re:This is a true disgrace-No Limits to my behavio (Score:5, Insightful)
And the Internet.
The story is about the MPAA, not the RIAA.
I'm aware of that, I used that to indicate that the economic model has gone anachronic with the new medium in place.
Quality sound and video. Additional material like "how we did it", and even games and other material. All for a reasonable price.
Never denied it. That's why I buy the DVDs for.
Now tell me again why you're justifying the abuse of a taxpayer funded, research network?
For the same reason that we are not locked up in cages and allowed to do nothing but work during our working hours.
Because we're not drones to abide by a set of rules and follow it to the dot. People use the network primarily for research, a small percentage use it for other purposes too. So fucking what?
When the rest of my taxpayer money is used to wage wars that I do not support and not in stem-cell research that I do support, you're more concerned about a bunch of kids using it for entertainment purposes.
And oh, Internet2 is not entirely taxpayer, it is supported by money from several companies -- AT&T, Intel, Sun, Cisco and the like.
Re:This is a true disgrace (Score:3, Funny)
what a good citizen would do.. (Score:5, Funny)
or have lawsuits become their bread-and-butter? *Sigh* either way.. I want to do my duty.
Revolutionary New Ratings Chart Based On Bootlegs (Score:2, Interesting)
So, they want to know WHAT's being traded. Does this mean that they're trying to establish some new rating system based on how many people pirate their movies? I mean, shouldn't they be trying to STOP file-swappers instead of just looking at what they're swapping?
I think I speak for all current college students.. (Score:2, Funny)
Re:I think I speak for all current college student (Score:4, Funny)
I can hear the Jiminy Crickets of the world crying out in pain!
Re:I think I speak for all current college student (Score:5, Funny)
Whatever happened to learning stuff?
Re:I think I speak for all current college student (Score:5, Insightful)
Gonna require one heck of a Network IDS ... (Score:5, Insightful)
Math problems again (Score:5, Insightful)
Just say NO!
Mission (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't want to give them any ideas, but the MPAA has a chance at getting in by claiming to want to devise a method for distributing movies legally. However, hopefully I2 will look beyond that and deny them entry...
that's not all (Score:2, Insightful)
Funny how that's conveniently left out of the submission.
This seems simple enough... (Score:5, Insightful)
Get a life, MPAA.
Hmmm.... (Score:5, Funny)
I hope they say no (Score:5, Insightful)
What it doesn't need is the massive commericalization that has occured on good oi' internet 1. Yes, piracy and filesharing that is unmonitored is definately a problem. But the real problem is not that it's unmonitored, it's that students with no need for access to the network have it. Why can Joe DormLiver piggy back on Internet2? Does he need research access?
They should politely tell the MPAA to fuck itself, and then develop some controlled access. I suggest only connecting research computers to the net, along with a few proxy servers so professors and grad students (and undergrads also doing research) can still use it remotely.
It would be interesting to do bonafide p2p and network research over Internet2, but that is not what the MPAA is looking for.
What would being a member do? (Score:3, Insightful)
Fake 'em out, man... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Fake 'em out, man... (Score:3, Interesting)
Then they'll flood it with their broken files, and inevitably end up suing each other over some similar file names, most likely movie soundtracks. 2 birds with one stone.
What would happen if... (Score:3, Interesting)
In any case, if someone can transfer the contents of a DVD within 5 seconds, they they would probably figure out some way of converting the files into something less noticable than an obvious archive of video and audio files. Convert everything into a tar file and convert that into something less noticable like floating-point volume data.
microcosm (Score:5, Insightful)
The great lesson here is that Internet2 is only a litmus test. The MPAA acts exactly the same way on Internet1, and everywhere else. We're just witnesses to the miracle of the birth of their racket on Internet2. Burn, Hollywood, Burn (our should I say "Stream").
Re:microcosm (Score:5, Informative)
The same PR reports that "the MPAA is already working with the Cooperation for Education Network Initiatives in California group, which is seeking gigabit-speed connections for California communities by 2010". Look for MPAA sniffers anywhere that packets flow. Not that they don't have the right to look in "public" traffic for booty flying by that infringes their rights. But they'd improve their image a lot more by actually contributing some value to these networks that will earn them billions of dollars, rather than just lying about doing so just to get to install the meter.
Re:microcosm (Score:3, Insightful)
You don't really get it, do you? People used to record tapes and lend it to friends, people now make Mp3s and share it. It's a new medium and one which does not fit the old business model that the **AA have so far benefitted from.
There've been _LOTS_ of times when I've downloaded a song/movie and realized that I like it, and later purchased it. If it's of bad
Where does this end? (Score:5, Insightful)
MPAA is living in a different world (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm still confused (Score:5, Insightful)
I suspect the MPAA wants to be a member more so they can go to the member meetings and make a stink. Keep an eye on things from the inside so to speak.
Too bad I'm funding their shenanigans... (Score:5, Interesting)
There have been times that I've downloaded a movie from the Internet, enjoyed it, and purchased that movie from a local store so that I could watch it in higher quality and benefit from the additional DVD features (Southpark Movie). Other times, I've realized that the time spent downloading a particular movie (Blair Witch Project) could've been better spent playing solitaire.
Sometime soon, I hope, the MPAA will realize that the money they spend sniffing out pirates (who
Somewhere, there is an MPAA representitive reading this article who is thinking "Hmmm....he's right...I could get a raise and people like Trey Parker and the
Well shit, it's ruined now (Score:5, Funny)
government should regulate internet2, not MPAA (Score:5, Insightful)
That said, I cannot support commercialization of Internet2 or an invasion of it by MPAA just to allow them to sue I2 users. But in order to keep internet2 aligned with its true goals of promoting research, we will have to give some governing council the authority (even imperative) to fight this piracy and THEN take it to the respective IP owners like MPAA. I think it is silly that the burden should fall on MPAA to regulate such things, and it is because of this lunatic system that we are forced to deal with lawsuits from companies who snoop at file sharers. Pirating movies should have a penalty similar to stealing them physically: go to the city court and explain yourself in front of a judge your crime and regret, rather than dealing with expensive lawyers and publicized cases as is happening now.
Re:government should regulate internet2, not MPAA (Score:4, Insightful)
Did you just suggest a new government organization to find, identify and report IP violations? Do you want the government to put people in jail, charge them money or just tattle to the MPAA and let them sue as they elect? Who's going to fund this governing council?
Membership denied (Score:5, Interesting)
The DMCA was used to threaten [eff.org] Ed Felton and his students into silence when they was about to present a research paper on the weaknesses of digital music security. The case sent a chilling tidal wave through the educational system.
With the spirit that Internet2 is designed for educational and research purposes and the precedent set by the Felton case, Hollywood's membership request should be denied in about three nanoseconds.
They are not welcome.
I2 Bylaws (Score:5, Informative)
Wait till they get a taste of IPv6... (Score:5, Interesting)
Wait till they get a taste of "privacy enhanced addresses" on IPv6 and find out some of those machines can change their addresses at random and not be tracable (only tracable to the subnet and no address server required or logs kept). They'll have to track'm down by MAC address (assuming no one is spoofing and morphing MAC addresses - how long will that take?) and wire by wire, switch by switch, once they're on the subnet itself, with the "cooperation" of the local techie staff. That's not even counting the really wicked stuff you can pull with multiple addresses (thousands, if you like) and different client and server addresses). BitTorrent already has IPv6 patches and some v6 BitTorrent seeders and servers.
Hmmm...
Internet2 + High Bandwidth + IPv6 + Privacy Enhanced addresses = good time to buy in stock in antacid vendors.
The MPAA and RIAA and going to make for a run on their wares...
Oh... This is gonna be good...
Re:Wait till they get a taste of IPv6... (Score:5, Informative)
Oh, and BTW, your ISP doesn't typically give you a
Now... For the home user, that's another story. Your network identifies a household and that's pretty tight. And, of course, all you home users can already use IPv6 any way you want (6to4 gives every IPv4 user an entire IPv6 NETWORK that you can use immediately without asking anyone's permission, including your ISP), and, yes, that's traceable to your IPv4 address. But, in real world IPv6 land, you can only get to the network (TLA/NLA) and subnetwork (SLA), if the user is assigning his own EUI (host) addresses, and you can't get any further without tracing on the subnet, when the activity is occuring.
You COULD set up tools on each subnet to log each IP address and each MAC address that was associated and what switch port (assuming you are using managed switches that can be quiried over SNMP for IPv6 type stuff) was in use for that operation, but I don't know of any tools available for that purpose at this time and it sure as hell isn't being logged anywhere.
So what if they come to your door demanding those logs! There are no logs to be had! It's stateless! No dhcp! No server! It's autoconfigured. God himself would have to have a time machine to figure out what IPv6 address you were on when they sniffed that traffic. If they get on NOW and they get the organization to log all activity through ALL their layer two switches, they MIGHT have a shot at catching you IF you hit the net again (and you weren't using IPSec or some other tunnelling mechanism)... Fat chance... Fat chance they will even get to the point where they even realize how badly they are screwed.
Better still, if you've got wireless involved (you better bet your sweet bippy that IPv6 native works just fine over 802.11* - I'm running it now). You can set up stand-alone wireless devices that sit out on the ether and throw IPv6 tunnels back over the Access Points they're sitting behind. Play IPv6 on P2P and tunnel it back to netland and no hard wire to be found (outside of the wall wart to power it). That's to say nothing of all these universities firing up 802.11 like they were stoking a blast furnice. Wifi to the Max and IPv6 to take it into orbit.
It's not impossible. Just a real BITCH compared to IPv4. A real major BITCH just to pony up to the bar and figure out how deep the well is just to begin searching... And that's where the fun begun.
OP doesn't know what hes talking about? (Score:4, Insightful)
What a horribly unsuccessful attempt to marry two completely disparate goals. The MPAA should be allowed to join the consortium as they have a justifiable interest in high speed delivery research. But monitor traffic? Come on . . . Those goals have about as much in common as Richard Stallman and Carmen Electra (respectively). They have no right to monitor traffic, and as a fairly democratic organization I don't believe the endnode members providers/sponsors would consent to it.
And for those of you wondering if monitoring of such gigantic flows is possible - of course it is. Netflow export can dump flow data to any number of IDS facilities. Even if you can't watch a single 10GigE link, watch the ten (10) GigE links that feed into it.
Being a "Member" (Score:3, Insightful)
Yeah, I'll need a membership too. (Score:3, Funny)
When can I expect the guy to come by and install my connection?
NewsFlash: MPAA check snail mail for pirate movies (Score:3, Interesting)
What will it cost them? (Score:3, Insightful)
Pardon, MPAA, your hypocrisy is showing... (Score:5, Insightful)
The following two quotes are from the MPAA's own 11/11/04 press release [mpaa.org]:
Must be terrible...the industry is losing $3.5 BILLION a year in revenue? They must just be drowning in the losses!
Wait a moment. This industry, suffering these massive, crippling losses from piracy, is doing BETTER than most sectors of the economy?
Here's the problem, and that is that the MPAA's figure is grossly inflated. Effectively, the MPAA figures EVERY download as a lost sale. (The MPAA's figures on downloading are also inflated, but that's pretty technical and better left to someone who can explain it comprehensively.) However, even provided that they're correct, they presume that EVERYONE who downloads a movie would have, instead, gone to a theater or bought a DVD in place of every download. (They also assume that these people don't do that anyway, and look at a lower-quality download to decide if the movie is WORTH seeing or purchasing on DVD.) This is, quite simply, not true.
It's time for the **AA's to quit whining. DESPITE widespread downloading, and bad business practices that turn customers away in large numbers, their revenues and market shares grow daily. Given that, it's hard for them to claim that downloads, whether on Internet1 or 2, are threatening to put them out of business.
piracy helps good movies (Score:4, Insightful)
A, um.. friend of mine, has downloaded probably a dozen movies off the Internet. He's bought 4 movies on DVD at full retail from Best Buy as a result of seeing these movies and wanting to have a DVD quality copy/support the makers/etc. Of the other 8 or so about half were bad movies, and he did not buy DVD's. The other half he only downloaded because they were still in theaters, and hollywood's idiotic policy means you can't watch it at home for months after the initial release, so he bought the DVD's once they were out. For example, he had the first 2 lord of the rings on full quality DVD almost a year before the actual DVD was out. These movies he saw in the theater more than once each, and has purchased both the normal versions and extended.
Again, him pirating movies has led to more purchases, and therefore more revenue for the MPAA.
Now all I need is a few GB of RAM apparently.. (Score:3, Funny)
Recently, researchers successfully sent data from Switzerland to Tokyo at speeds of 7.21 gigabits per second. That was enough speed to transfer a full-length DVD anywhere in the world in less than five seconds, researchers said.
Too bad it'll take me upwards of five minutes to write it to disk. Yet more proof that hard drive speeds are dragging the rest of the industry down. Damn you Hitachi/Fujitsu/WesternDigital/Seagate/Maxtor. Damn you all.
MPAA will get their way regardless (Score:3, Interesting)
Just what we need. MPAA police. (Score:3, Interesting)
Pissing in the wind... (Score:4, Interesting)
What about networks of bluetooth enabled phones/portable MP3 players/car stereos that each hold several gigabytes of music and which can automatically connect to each other ?
You want a particular song ? You want all songs by a particular artist ? You're interested in a particular genre ?
Put search criteria on your devices wanted list and when you come into proximity of another devices that holds what you're looking for it transfers it over while you walk past/are drinking at a bar/are in a club/are sitting in a traffic jam etc. etc.
"Walkabout" short range P2P.
And for added social interaction then if someone elses device show the same sorts of preferences as yours it give both of you a little beep so you can start up a conversation.
Also how about "slightly more powerful than today" local neighbourhood wireless LANS ? Even if you're not part of the full time local network their might be guest channels/log ins/local broadcsts so when you drive through a neighbourhood you join in the local "neighbourhood swap shop".
But the best is yet to come. How about when storage capacity is available on something approaching, or even on, a nano scale ?
Maybe someone will create a "smart sticker" which is slightly thicker than todays regular sticker but which holds several gigbytes of data plus a small, solar powered, short range, transmitter.
Pop that up in a public place and everyone passing can pick up what's on it (so long as they have a compatible device). Guerilla marketing at it's best and a killer way to advertise new bands "come see us at club x on x and here are a few full tunes to whet your appetitie"
Who knows maybe this "fantasy tech" could even be incorporated into clothing, beer cans, grocery cartons, bricks... you name it.
So these *AA imbeciles can legislate, bribe and sue until they're blue in the face but they are simply pissing in the wind.
If they think they're having a hard time with todays technology, then think what the future will bring.
Re:The Purpose of Internet2 (Score:5, Informative)
It's physically separate; that's why it's faster.
Re:Waste of money (Score:3, Informative)