P2P Polluter Shuts Down 90
Dotnaught writes "Loudeye Corp. said today it is closing its anti-piracy unit, Overpeer, Inc., in an effort to cut costs. Overpeer is best known for polluting P2P networks with garbled digital files. For what it's worth, the Internet filter at CMP Media, where I work, blocks Overpeer's site as 'spyware.'"
P2P Polluter Shuts Down... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:P2P Polluter Shuts Down... (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:P2P Polluter Shuts Down... (Score:1)
Re:P2P Polluter Shuts Down... (Score:2)
good (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:good (Score:1)
Surely the copyright violation going on in the first place is a bigger waste of packets?
Yeah, copyright violates us all [google.com].
And? (Score:5, Interesting)
For what it's worth, a friend that works at Honeywell says that Bug Me Not's site is blocked as "hacking and subversion tools".
Yeah, exactly, so what?
Well obviously ... (Score:1)
Re:And? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:And? (Score:1)
For what it's worth, the Internet filter at CMP Media, where I work, blocks Overpeer's site as 'spyware.'
and wonder if that is why my dialup provider has this site blocked:
http://www.usatoday.com/ [usatoday.com]
Really. My account is with Gulf Pines Communications, used to be Nexband.
My cable modem provider does NOT have it blocked, and I have to use that to read the news!
That provider is Suscom.
Sound deterioration (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Sound deterioration (Score:1)
Morphing and going into hiding, more likely. (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Morphing and going into hiding, more likely. (Score:5, Insightful)
The real problem isn't from savvy file sharers, but rather clueless ones who download the files, don't care that they are corrupted (or more likely, just download them and never actually listen to them), and keep sharing them forever.
Re:Morphing and going into hiding, more likely. (Score:2)
Fakes are an annoying part of P2P life.
Re:Morphing and going into hiding, more likely. (Score:4, Insightful)
More likely it was just a simple business decision because Overpeer just hasn't really done anything to justify the money spent on it, much less in terms of reducing P2P activity. Oh sure, providing demographic data by monitoring filesharing is one thing, but all network poisoning does is generate more bad press for the media companies. Maybe somebody upstairs realized that a. it was a stupid idea to begin with, and b. wasn't working anyway.
Re:Morphing and going into hiding, more likely. (Score:4, Informative)
Pssst; I think he meant using cable modem accounts to hide amongst the masses.
BTW - if you (the general 'you') don't check your downloads and automatically share them out again you are donating your bandwidth to their efforts. Clean up the P2P - stage and scan your downloads!
Re:Morphing and going into hiding, more likely. (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Morphing and going into hiding, more likely. (Score:2)
I'm sorry, that's completely impossible. Humans are incapable of abandoning a practice based on those grounds, based on my observation of the entire political/economical system. What had to have happened was, their astrology guide told them it was a bad day to do business, so they shut down.
Re:Morphing and going into hiding, more likely. (Score:4, Insightful)
Btw, I hardly use any P2P. Most of the files on my disk come from people I know who wanted to share some music they find interesting.
Re:Morphing and going into hiding, more likely. (Score:2)
Re:Morphing and going into hiding, more likely. (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Morphing and going into hiding, more likely. (Score:2, Informative)
I suspect Overpeer just aren't relevant anymore - the core P2P networks ha
no point anyway (Score:3, Insightful)
Comment removed (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:no point anyway (Score:1)
This precludes them from purchase considerations.
On top of that I do not purchase music on cd any longer.
When I find the time I look for independant stuff that is
often times free anyway. Reading posts like yours just
keeps getting older and older. Shut up already.
Re:no point anyway (Score:2, Interesting)
Anyway, this had about 900 times the number of seeders on limewire than the real fahrenheit 911, and subsequently appeard to be more "legit" so more people downloaded it thus feeding the il
Re:no point anyway (Score:2)
Not really a huge victory... (Score:5, Insightful)
I guess the good thing is that now the jackasses that worked for these people are now unemployed - while I largely disagree with illegal P2P filesharing, I can see that it's a symptom of overpriced and 'evil' cartels and hate the fact that they employ shitheads like this, who's sole buisness is rooted firmly into the 'annoy as many people as we can for fun and profit' business model, rather than realising they'd get far more sales (and thus more profit) if they lowered their damn profit margin on every disc
(then again, they'd also save money if they signed good, existing, unsigned bands instead of manufacturing cookie-cutter Britney pop and having to pay songwriters, etc hundreds of thousands of dollars rather than getting the whole thing in one package by signing up real bands, but I can't see that happening any time soon...)
Re:Not really a huge victory... (Score:3, Informative)
At the places (dare I say hubs) that I frequent, sharing incomplete or multiple corrupted files gains you an instant ban.
This seems to work, because in all the years I have been around I've only ever had 2 misidentied files (and one of them was just my fault - red eye 2005 korea version).
Verify your shares folks.
Re:Not really a huge victory... (Score:1)
Re:Not really a huge victory... (Score:2)
Re:Not really a huge victory... (Score:2)
Re:Not really a huge victory... (Score:2)
Re:Not really a huge victory... (Score:2)
The "incomplete" files that the original poster was referring to are not incomplete because the sharer's software didn't finish downloading them. The files are incomplete because the original downloaded file was messed up in some way. For instance, some people who just want some porn might take the temp file out of the Incomplete directory and watch it even if it isn't done downloading. If they then share this file, it is "incomplete" even
Re:Not really a huge victory... (Score:2)
Re:Not really a huge victory... (Score:2)
Building relationships with potential customer... (Score:5, Funny)
Really? I'd like to know how they went around to build these relationships:
Re:Building relationships with potential customer. (Score:2)
Tis the season for giving (Score:4, Funny)
-/Fires up Shareaza in the spirit of Christmas...
Re:Tis the season for giving (Score:1)
What this really means (Score:5, Insightful)
a) The record companies didn't find this type of disruption cost-effective
or
b) Somebody else can do it better/cheaper
Sounds like bad management (Score:2)
Reading between the lines, note that it's not the RIAA deciding not to hire these guys any more. They're simply stopping the service. "Effective immediately" is usually code for "Man, we're so screwed up that it's not even worth the effort to pretend." They're not selling the sub-company, or finishing out the month. It's the most undignified way to close out a company.
Basically, that smacks of bad management to me. Maybe they were being effective, m
Re:What this really means (Score:1)
Ha, but i bet it was sampled at 320 kbps and the file was at least 40 mB.
Yeah, those Britney songs really sound better at higher bitrates......
Glad this does not affect eMule/Bittorrent (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Glad this does not affect eMule/Bittorrent (Score:2)
Re:Glad this does not affect eMule/Bittorrent (Score:4, Informative)
The file is split into logical chunks, and the hash of each chunk is taken when a torrent file is created. When the client downloads, it checks each chunk, as soon as it finishes, against the hash provided for that chunk in the torrent file. I'm not actually sure what kind of particular hashing algorithm it uses, and I honestly don't care.
Re:Glad this does not affect eMule/Bittorrent (Score:2, Informative)
Credence for FileSharing without P2P Pollution... (Score:5, Informative)
By the way, OverPeer is by no means the only polluter out there. There are spammers who serve the same iPod ad under every conceivable name. Credence marks those as crap and moves them to the bottom of the list, once someone else has voted on them.
Previous Slashdot discussion on Credence [slashdot.org] is here.
kids, remember... (Score:2)
Are they the ones.. (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Are they the ones.. (Score:1)
Re:Are they the ones.. (Score:1)
Re:Are they the ones.. (Score:1)
Re:Are they the ones.. (Score:1)
Re:Are they the ones.. (Score:1)
Where do these numbers come from? (Score:4, Interesting)
What the hell does that mean? I agree with the man that spoofing won't stop file sharing (it hasn't yet, anyway) but from what part of his anatomy did he pull those numbers?
Re:Where do these numbers come from? (Score:1)
Re:Where do these numbers come from? (Score:1, Informative)
P2P nodes rarely exceed a few hundred thousand peers, that's where the hundred thousand comes from. He isn't saying you need a hundred thousand servers in your cluster so you can spam pirates--google would die from envy. He says you need a metric assload (10,000, for you SAE people) files in distrubution to make an impact on what people download. That also sounds reasonable. People download
Obligatory Nelson... (Score:2)
Re:Obligatory Nelson... (Score:1)
Now that P2P is safe... (Score:2)
excuses (Score:2)
Re:excuses (Score:1)
(Or could something like this be why they decided not to continue the project?)
They are only improving P2P (Score:4, Interesting)
It will only result in more sophisticated clients. Some features which may circumvent this method are -
-Rating : polluters can also artificially rate their files high, but assuming that pirates outnumber them by thousands, its highly useful.
-Hashing : polluters can easily create and hash their files, but this will stop them from polluting existing stuff.
-Preview : preview-before-download is most effective way of checking if a file is valid
-Blocking : autoblocking a user if he has a lot of wrong files.
-Chat : asking the user about the file's quality. You cant expect a polluter to sit 24x7 in front of his servers chatting with millions.
-Voice and music recognition : the s/w may evolve so much that it will recognize any speech and music information present in the file and will warn if not found. Same can be done with images.
-Encryption : a trusted network can start encrypting the files, if client provides such a feature.
-Redundancy : a p2p network can have dedicated servers to copy bits of files and place them on client machines. A million copies can beat a few polluted ones.
Re:They are only improving P2P (Score:2)
Bare numbers rating, no. Some sort of web-of-trust network, yes. But that is a lot more complex, and requires some sort of distributed sharing of ratings. A central one will probably be shut down, almost what suprnova.org was, and the poison client can also just send you poison votes. Basicly, out of millions of users it's unlikely to be much of a trust relationship betwe
DC++ (Score:1)
It was one of the reasons I dropped k-lite and started using direct connect (or more accurately, returned to DC++ after 3 years or so.)
The setup of a DC hub effectively NULLIFIED people (and companies, someone actually got paid to do this???...whatever) who spread junk files like this. If you download a crap file, you simply notify an op, and if the offending share isn't cleaned up, that user is simply kicked and banned from the hub. All you