boycott-riaa.com - Article: MPAA Sues BitTorrent

MPAA Sues BitTorrent

Posted by Tom Barger on December 13, 2004 at 8:24 PM (printer friendly)

Riding the eDonkey
MPAA prepares to crackdown on servers

By BEN FRITZ for Variety

The MPAAMPAA is cracking down on two of the biggest peer-to-peer networks used for movie piracy.

Trade org is expected to announce today that it's working with law enforcement authorities in the U.S. and Europe to arrest individuals and groups who run indexing servers for eDonkey and BitTorrent.

A recent study by piracy tracking company BayTSP found eDonkey was the most popular P2P network in November, while BitTorrent is regarded as the fastest growing, particularly for movie downloading.

Move comes several days after the MPAA and RIAARIAA won the right to appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court a lower court decision legalizing decentralized P2P networks (Daily Variety, Dec. 13). But while P2P networks themselves are still legal despite industry efforts to shut them down, indexing servers that help users locate and download pirated content are not.

Devil's in the server

The fact that the defunct Napster ran such servers, while Grokster and Streamcast Networks, defendants in the Supreme Court case, do not, was cited by lower courts as a key reason why Napster was ruled illegal but the newer networks weren't.

Developers of BitTorrent and eDonkey don't run their own indexing servers. However, many individuals and groups involved in online piracy do, and they're expected to be the targets of the new legal crackdowns.

"If it can be demonstrated they lent substantial assistance to copyright infringement and had knowledge of what they were doing, it's a strong case that fits in line with Napster," explained Michael S. Elkin, head of the entertainment and media group at law firm Thelen, Reid & Priest

Several sources close to the MPAA confirmed the planned actions, although reps for the group weren't talking before today's press conference in Washington, D.C.

Adding up suits

Criminal and possibly civil action against those running indexing servers will come on top of the hundreds of suits the MPAA recently began filing against individuals accused of pirating movies

Along with MPAA CEO Dan Glickman and the org's worldwide anti-piracy toppertopper John Malcolm, BayTSP CEO Mark Ishikawa will be present at the press conference. He'll most likely talk about trends in movie downloading, although the company has not worked with the MPAA in any of its actions.

In addition, Travis Kalanick, CEO of fledgling P2P distribution firm RedSwoosh is set to attend. In an effort to demonstrate MPAA's interest in what it sees as more positive uses of technology, Kalanick is expected to talk about how his firm works with studios to distribute promotional video clips online using P2P technology.

Ironically, Kalanick previously headed P2P network Scour, which was effectively shut down by a $250 billion lawsuit by the MPAA and RIAA.

User Comments (These do not necessarily reflect the beliefs of this site)


tomsong	Date: December 13, 2004 @ 8:24 PM Extended community effort to define Bit Torrent's capabilities here at Wiki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BitTorrent

tomsong	Date: December 13, 2004 @ 8:26 PM The FTC Workshop on Dec. 15 and 16th will feature the events' final; wrap up panel with Sam Yaga of eDonkey. So this publicity stunt today was no coincidence. The FTC workshop will also feature J.A. Pouwelse,Department of Computer Science, Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands, whose staff has conducted a measurement study that shows the inner workings and performance of the Bittorrent P2P download protocol and the Suprnova.org content management website. Shown is for example the stability of 1,941 BitTorrent trackers in an 8 month period and the Flashcrowd effect during the massive downloading of "Lord of the Rings III", and the performance of the moderation system on SuprNova. See the study here pds.twi.tudelft.nl/~pawel/pub/btmeasurement.pdf

CodeWarrior	Date: December 13, 2004 @ 9:36 PM Tell you one thing..I am getting sicker and sicker of these slimy bastards suing everyone...and especially sick of those greasy little BayTSP toadies... I even think BayTSP is in some ways worse than the RIAA and MPAA... bastards, every friggin' one of them!

Diogenes2	Date: December 13, 2004 @ 10:42 PM ". . . a $250 billion lawsuit by the MPAA and RIAA." Let's see: a quarter of a TRILLION dollars -- I'm calling this the likely highest case of ludicrous litigation on record. (As if the MPAA & the RIAA could remotely/possibly ever sustain that much damage -- even including punitive -- this fiasco is just that, absurd. They're not even in the real world. Trouble is, these days UNREAL people and organizations hold sway, don't they? Or, are we just going to wake up one day to realize all the bad stuff we've been witnessing and experiencing is just a run-together nightmare? Someone pinch me; I need to leave bad dreams behind. Either that or stop the world for a moment; I think I want to get off for awhile...maybe a long while. Otherwise, let's see -- among the other minor things on my agenda for today, I think I'll file a trivial trillion-dollar lawsuit against the estate of a former teacher who put me down decades ago and indirectly may have prevented me from becoming the world's first trillionaire. Yeah, right.

awehr	Date: December 13, 2004 @ 11:09 PM They think the main index sites like suprnova are responsible for actually acting as trackers. They dont understand that destruction of the original index site leaves the thousands of trackers which feed it in tact. I wish them luck going after those trackers as well. Not only are the index sites often in non-wipo or copy-liberal nations, but the individual trackers are also located in obscure places like the camoro islands.

CodeWarrior	Date: December 13, 2004 @ 11:30 PM I wish this angry British Telecom call receiver would call MPAA and RIAA and let them know what we think of them,... http://www.cndl21173.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/downloads/bt.mp3

gdZiemann	Date: December 14, 2004 @ 12:07 AM I never cease to be amazed by the sheer vast depth of the entertainment industry's stupidity. Kind of makes you wonder how they even find their way to work every morning.

wet1	Date: December 14, 2004 @ 12:07 AM They are taking a page right out of the law enforcement books. When a bust of some sort occurs and especially if they know it will be in the paper, the common thing is to inflate the value of the operation by quoting unreal values. It sounds like it was really a huge haul but if the real value was printed folks would look around and wonder why they bothered. In drug busts it is common to list it as street value. No volume drug dealer gets street value. If they did there would be no reason for the street dealer to push drugs as there would be no profit in it. In headlines though, large figures get attention. So does timing. I would hate to count the staged busts I have heard over my life while reading the paper or listening to the news. Some politican up for election or a kick off of a new program of sorts is all that is needed to stage such. They are merely stages set to try and convince the public that it is needed, whether it is true or not. Basically it is a justification attempt to get acceptance of some idea. In this case that copywrite infringement is killing the industry. Keep in mind that Joe Public doesn't keep up with this stuff and for the most part doesn't have a clue on the real happenings. All Joe sees are these attention grabbing headlines. The very thing that the RIAA and the MPAA is a specialist at. Over the years, how many movie trailers or adverts have you seen saying that this movie or that group is putting out a new item? Out of those how many were actually worth the money and how many were nothing but hype in your opinion? No matter what your interest, no matter the venue or genre, I am sure you will come up with the same thing. Most were far overblown in proportion to those that were really good. You got your expectations up and then were let down by the hype. For ages they have milked the consumer in this manner. They long ago honed their skills in this department so nothing of this sort suprises me and I suspect that when you think about it; there is no suprise at such staging.

compmore	Date: December 14, 2004 @ 1:04 AM when they see what happened when napster was broken up they honestly think this'll work?

compmore	Date: December 14, 2004 @ 1:04 AM perhaps someone will go download every torrent they could find then share them on decentralized P2P

TechnoPuppet	Date: December 14, 2004 @ 3:00 AM Scour...Been a while since i've heard that one. Seems like ages ago.

goldenpi	Date: December 14, 2004 @ 3:29 AM BT will be a moderately difficult target. Its just a matter of shutting down a large number of trackers and their operators. As these trackers must be explicitly set to handle an infringing file by the operator, they are legally easy to stop. They can try setting up somewhere with liberal copyright law, but its only a time-buying stratagy. Shutting down ed2k servers is more worrying. Ed2k servers are almost as easy targets (many in Europe have been attacked by a software-copyright organisation), but handle noninfringing files also. If the supreme court goes well, we might have a precident to protect p2p networks. However, it will be useless without equal protection for each component of the networks. What is the use of protecting p2p developers, when noone dares to run a server?

PhantomGhost	Date: December 14, 2004 @ 4:09 AM We all knew this was going to happen sooner or later. The industry will stop at nothing to stifle innovation in the name of its crusade against "piracy". :-:~ Phantom

awehr	Date: December 14, 2004 @ 5:04 AM * As these trackers must be explicitly set to handle an infringing file by the operator, they are legally easy to stop.* I would like to note that many large index sites have automated submission processes. Theyre left pretty much untouched by their owners for months. As for the many trackers which actually house the files.. the average number from what i've seen is circa 20 torrents. That is a nothing.. It would take forever to kill bit torrent 20 files at a time.

Diogenes2	Date: December 14, 2004 @ 5:28 AM Maybe that's why they're using the courts to go after the servers; they know they can't actually stop the bit-torrent process itself . . . but if they can make a few high-profile examples against the servers...they can hope to stifle things that way?

goldenpi	Date: December 14, 2004 @ 6:37 AM 20 files to a tracker. How many trackers to an operator? How many operators will be scared into shutting down? It could be a serious annoyance. New overseas trackers will appear, edventually. But it will be disruptive.

awehr	Date: December 14, 2004 @ 7:31 AM that's the problem though. You can only order the takedown of a given site at a time. The largest ones like Suprnova are already out of reach. I've heard of dirtier tactics of somehow fanagling their dns away from them through work in the US. but that is only a temporary measure.

dogpile	Date: December 14, 2004 @ 9:12 AM All about money and nothing else. Just a matter of time when the MPAA and RIAA will face its arch enemy, just as MS with linux.

independentm...	Date: December 14, 2004 @ 10:10 AM WE are the arch enemy... ...an informed and angry public!

goldenpi	Date: December 14, 2004 @ 11:04 AM There was an incident a few years back. A free-mp3 site hosted somewhere in China proved resistant to the RIAAs best attempts to shut it down, so they claimed that internet backbones, having the capability to block all traffic from the IP entering the US, were legally obliged to prevent the infringment. It was working its way through the courts, becoming a very intresting case... when the site in question vanished mysteriously.

dvdzipper	Date: December 14, 2004 @ 1:27 PM ...an informed and angry public! -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- goldenpi There was an incident a few years back. A free-mp3 site hosted somewhere in China proved resistant to the RIAAs best attempts to shut it down, so they claimed that internet backbones, having the capability to block all traffic from the IP entering the US, were legally obliged to prevent the infringment. It was working its way through the courts, becoming a very intresting case... when the site in question vanished mysteriously. I do remeber that case but if it was that to do that the riaa amd mpaa would have tried it long. the first big problem with that is you have to go after the big telecom backbones and they will fight that and i think they have even bigger pockets then the riaa what would that really it be easy to use a another provider. there have been more recent cases where states tried to do that with child porn and it was declared unconstitutioal.

DeadMan2003	Date: December 14, 2004 @ 5:06 PM http://www.wired.com/news/digiwood/0,1412,66034,00.html?tw=newsletter_topstories_html Hollywood movie studios launched new legal action Tuesday against operators of sites that help connect people to movies on three major peer-to-peer file-sharing networks. In the United States and the United Kingdom, the Motion Picture Association of America, the main lobbying arm of U.S. film studios, filed civil lawsuits against more than 100 operators of BitTorrent "tracker" servers that point to locations where digital copies of movies can be found. The MPAA also targeted operators of servers for the eDonkey and Direct Connect networks. The group's actions include criminal complaints and cease-and-desist orders issued to ISPs on four continents. Acting in cooperation with the MPAA, French law enforcement authorities took related action Monday, and actions by authorities in Finland and the Netherlands followed Tuesday. BitTorrent, eDonkey and Direct Connect allow millions of internet users to share copies of movies, music, software and games. The services don't host the files themselves; instead, they point users to other users who have the files available for sharing. In BitTorrent's case, users tap tracker sites that keep dynamic lists of where files are stored and available for download. The MPAA is trying to cripple BitTorrent and its peers by suing people who host the tracker servers. Because of its efficiency in helping users handle very large files -- such as digital copies of feature-length films -- BitTorrent has attracted the enmity of Hollywood. "We believe the internet will be a powerful tool for the legitimate use of content," said MPAA head Dan Glickman. "Our actions today are aimed solely at those who have knowingly chosen to use the net for illegal activity." MPAA antipiracy chief John Malcolm said the trade organization's actions were not aimed at criminalizing P2P technology itself, citing "legal torrent" services that specialize in public-domain material as examples of the technology's non-infringing potential. Malcolm described the operators of the targeted servers as "traffic cops connecting those who wish to steal a movie with those who have a copy of it." "These people are parasites leeching off the creativity of others," said Malcolm. "They generate ad revenues by way of pop-up ads, banner ads and they solicit online donations." Previously, the MPAA had filed hundreds of suits against individual downloaders. The new actions against server operators come just days after the Supreme Court agreed to take up the landmark MGM v. Grokster file-sharing case. MPAA representatives said the timing of Tuesday's news was unrelated. In August, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that peer-to-peer companies cannot be held responsible for intellectual property infringement that may take place on their networks, because the technologies can be used for legitimate, non-infringing purposes. After urgent requests from the MPAA, the Recording Industry Association of America and a class of 27,0000 songwriters and musicians, the high court agreed last week to decide the case on appeal. For now, P2P services such as Grokster, BitTorrent and eDonkey are not illegal. But so-called "indexing servers" that help users download copyright content are. In its original architecture, the Napster network used a centralized database to keep track of which user had which file. Other decentralized nets such as Grokster do not have a central repository -- and this distinction became a key reason why the courts banned Napster while permitting Grokster and StreamCast Networks to continue. The BitTorrent tracker sites do not hold content themselves, but serve as a dynamic library of URLs that shows users where portions of files are located within the constellation of participating nodes. They help to connect users who want a file with other users who have that file on their hard drive. While this new round of legal attacks represent the first time the MPAA has attempted to sue parties responsible for hosting trackers, both BitTorrent and eDonkey have been in the entertainment trade group's sights for some time. As the popularity of both services has boomed in recent months, the MPAA has escalated its attempts to compel ISPs to take action against activities within their domains. MPAA representatives said Tuesday the organization had no plans to pursue legal action against BitTorrent creator Bram Cohen, or against websites that post the locations of BitTorrent trackers.

awehr	Date: December 14, 2004 @ 5:38 PM MY FRIEND JUST PASSED ME A GREAT IDEA!! I say they should put DRM on the bit torrent client to prevent IP sniffing, then sue the MPAA/RIAA for DMCA violation when they try to sue people for infringement!

DeadMan2003	Date: December 14, 2004 @ 6:04 PM Shareconnector and Releases4U taken down. --- (By Laurens Verhagen) Investigation agency FIOD (FIOD-ECD, tax and economic crimes police) closes large edonkey sites Tuesday, december 14th 2004 - After complaints from Brein, the FIOD has seized the server that run the edonkey sites Releases4u and Shareconnector. Tuesday morning the fiscal investigation agency FIOD-ECD seized 4 servers in Rotterdam that hosted the 2 biggest edonkey sites in Holland, Brein has declared. In 9 places a total of 8 people were arrested and 11 computers were seized. Releases4U and ShareConnector offered links to illegal files that were checked for content and quality, especially the latest movies, games, music and other content. Brein had been talking with the people behind these sites for a while now, but these talks yielded no results. "Our patience was up, after which we went to the authorities", says Tim Kuik, director of Brein. According to him this is the first in a series of moves against "services that play an essential role in the exchange of illegal files". These files aren't offered from the abovementioned sites itselfm but are hosted on the computers of the users of p2p service edonkey. "Illegal files in good quality are often hard to find", says Brein. "Not Illegal" The 8 persons were arrested for suspicion of committing copyright infringement and accessory to that crime. SC and R4U offered about 10.000 links to illegal files for about 50.000 registered users, and a multitude of that of consumers. The people behind the sites told Webwereld a while ago that there is nothing illegal about so called ed2k links. The hostingprovider of the 2 sites, Mindlab, earlier refused to take down the 2 sites. "As long as offering these links is not a crime, we will let them run their sites", Zefanja Nafzger declared to Webwereld earlier. Millions in damages The damage of this kind of illegal practice can reach significant amounts, Kuik says. He points out that the owner of the site Film88.com recently was convicted to paying $23,8 million in damages. Brein will hold not only SC and R4U responsible for the damages, but also Mindlab, the provider. Kuik estimates the damages sought to be "several millions (of Euros)". Besides that the OM (prosucutor's office) is likely to start a criminal procedure against the site owners. The maximum penalty is 4 years in prison, according to Kuik. Kuik says that services like SC and R4U hide behind "false reasoning that illegal files are actually hosted on different servers and that the actual exchange doesn't take place on their own servers". "However, it is clear they are the ones responsible for the illegal spreading of these files", Brein concludes. Translated from http://www.webwereld.nl/nieuws/20294.phtml --- FIOD-ECD throws internetpages offline Submitted 14th of December 2004 15:58 The Hague - The FIOD-ECD closed down 2 Dutch internet pages on tuesday. The pages offered links to illegal copies of movies, games and music. On 9 spots in the Netherlands computers, servers and administration were seized. The police carried out a total of 8 arrests. According to the police the Dutch pages shareconnector.com and releases4u.com hosted thousands of links to files for approximately 40.000 members and a multitude of users. Several suspects were part of the exchange network DVD Europe that offers movies, games and music illegaly, often even before the legal store release date, according to the police. Earlier the police and justice departments in Germany and Switzerland closed down similar sites. It's the first time sites like these are taken down in Holland. Translated from http://www.nu.nl/news.jsp?n=455650&c=54

awehr	Date: December 14, 2004 @ 6:36 PM They did this to boxtorrents, if you remember. IT was quickly replaced They did it to mircx.com, and it was replaced by mirkx, and then by toshokon. Wait a max of 2 weeks, its replacement will be up and running.

independentm...	Date: December 14, 2004 @ 6:38 PM whack a mole

awehr	Date: December 14, 2004 @ 6:40 PM I also wish to say that... 10,000 files are nothing.

awehr	Date: December 14, 2004 @ 6:40 PM wack a mole.. wack a very small mole =).. microbestiality.

CodeWarrior	Date: December 14, 2004 @ 7:56 PM Look...try as these a-holes will, they will never shut down filesharing...it is a grassroots movement...filesharers are like the American revolutionaries.... "It's our turf, and we will wait you out. We will win." So, my message to the RIAA and MPAA...you're gonna lose, and in the process...seriously piss off a lot of technically sophisticated young people...good luck a-holes!

CodeWarrior	Date: December 14, 2004 @ 7:59 PM "Only people as mentally constipated as members of the MPAA and RIAA would ever consider that suing your customers is a winning plan." = CodeWarriorz Thoughts

Capt-n-Jack	Date: December 14, 2004 @ 8:30 PM Filesharing was started by regular people with purchased products. The RIAA (& MPAA) believe there was/is money to be made, so they want to stick their nose in regular people's business, to make a business model out of it, while condeming people's control. They will never win this battle!!

RiaaKidKosher	Date: December 14, 2004 @ 8:33 PM Once again the Hollywood Jews are on the witchhunt for P2P networks. There's no end to the greed in which the likes of Sumner Redstone of Viacom, Michael Eisner of Disney, The Weinstein Brothers of Miramax, Jeff Katzenberg of Dreamworks, Edgar Brothman, this Dan Glickman, Hilary Rosen and the rest of the Hollywood Kosher Empire in their endless assault on our people. All this while we pretend that the Japanesse control the media. Sorry leftlaw, We know that these chaps are from your tribe but the truth and names of these thugs are the truth...You decide.

RiaaKidKosher	Date: December 14, 2004 @ 8:38 PM Can this be the reasoning why Andy Dick is still able to get a job while horsefaced Sara Jessica Parker and Ben Stiller are pushed as beautiful people in Hollywood?? You go figure...

pinemikey	Date: December 14, 2004 @ 8:43 PM The MPAA has paid some cash to have CNN post their story here: http://money.cnn.com/2004/12/14/news/fortune500/piracy/index.htm?cnn=yes Here's a snippet which actually proves these scum are spitting into the wind. For now, reliable data on the prevalence of illegal movie downloads and the cost to Hollywood do not exist. The MPAA itself, which claims its on track to lose $3.5 billion this year to the black market in physical DVDs, does not yet know how much money the industry loses on the Web. The MPAA's Malcolm said Tuesday that the problem of Internet piracy is on par with widespread copying of physical DVDs. In three years, he estimates industry losses from online theft will be "staggeringly high." Also one of the most objectionable quotes is this: "But Charles Sims, a New York lawyer who has represented entertainment companies in court cases against peer-to-peer networks, said Hollywood recognizes that litigation is not the panacea. "The (lawsuit) route is not perfect, in the same way that the war against drugs isn't perfect either," said Sims, a partner in Proskauer Rose. "But there's probably less heroine and cocaine out there now than if we weren't doing anything." How about that..now file sharers are being compared to drug addicts. Really lovely bunch of people the RIAA and the MPAA have hired. I bet they also make excellent political operatives. Why tell the truth when you can put out a lie?

DeadMan2003	Date: December 14, 2004 @ 9:25 PM http://news.com.com/MPAA+targets+core+BitTorrent%2C+eDonkey+users/2100-1025_3-5490804.html?tag=nefd.lede update The Motion Picture Association of America launched a new legal campaign Tuesday targeting the BitTorrent and eDonkey file-swapping networks, two technologies widely used to trade movies online. Ratcheting up its previous online antipiracy efforts, the Hollywood group is working with law enforcement agencies in the United States and Europe to target and arrest individuals who play a critical role in the functioning of each type of network. Criminal actions have already been filed in Europe, including the seizure of seven Net-connected servers, with their operator still wanted by French police, a representative of the French government said. "These people are parasites, leeching off the creative activity of others," said John Malcolm, the MPAA's director of worldwide antipiracy operations. They "serve as traffic cops connecting those who want to steal movies with those who have a copy and want to provide it." The cross-border legal actions mark a strong new attack on peer-to-peer networks, which have continued to thrive over the past several years despite lawsuits against software developers and nearly 7,000 individuals accused of trading copyrighted music online. BitTorrent and eDonkey each have grown rapidly over the past two years, threatening to become to the movie industry what Napster initially was to the record labels. Each technology is designed specifically to speed downloads of very large files, and has been used widely to distribute full-length movies, computer games and software. BitTorrent in particular has become a recent concern for Hollywood companies desperate to stop video piracy before it cuts into their soaring DVD sales revenues. The threat of potential criminal penalties substantially raises the stakes for those helping to distribute a film using the technology, in what the studios hope will be a more effective deterrence than previous actions. According to Net monitoring firm BayTSP, eDonkey recently passed up Kazaa as the most popular file-swapping network in the world, measured by number of users. Other network monitors have said that BitTorrent has long been the most popular measured by the amount of data transferred between users. Who's being sued? Understanding exactly who has been targeted in the latest peer-to-peer dragnet requires a little understanding of how each network works, however. In the early days of Napster, a central server operated by that company kept a huge index of all content available on the network and where it was located, matching downloaders with people who had a particular piece of content. The recording industry was able to successfully sue Napster after judges said that a centrally operated index made the company legally responsible for piracy on the network. Record labels and movie studios then sued a second generation of file-swapping companies, which offered decentralized services in which the traffic-directing role was played by individual users' computers, rather than a central server. Judges said those companies are not legally responsible for their users' actions, and the entertainment companies have appealed that decision all the way to the Supreme Court. eDonkey has been a hybrid of those two types of systems. In its early days, individual users maintained Napster-like central servers that managed traffic on the network. Many people still use that older version of the technology; it is the operators of those servers that the MPAA is now targeting. However, the creators of the eDonkey software said most searches are now done using the newer, wholly decentralized software. "eDonkey doesn't rely on central servers anymore, so taking them offline won't effect the network adversely," said eDonkey creator Jed McCaleb. "The servers are only used to connect with old and third-party clients. The BitTorrent difference BitTorrent works completely differently. In that system, individuals who want to share a file prep it for distribution, creating a "torrent" file that uniquely identifies the content and tells computers how to get it. That resulting how-to file can be spread around the Net, posted on Web sites, or spread through chat networks like the Internet Relay Chat. Included in this torrent file is information about how to get to a "tracker" server, which actually facilitates all the uploads and downloads associated with a single particular piece of content. That server is sometimes run by the original distributor of the content, and sometimes by an unrelated third party. If the tracker server linked to a particular piece of content goes offline, existing downloads of the file can continue, but no new people can begin downloading that file. The MPAA actions are directed at the people who operate these tracker servers, rather than people who might casually find a link to BitTorrent content and begin downloading the content themselves. The Hollywood group said it is also targeting the operators of Direct Connect servers, a technology that works much like the old Napster. The FBI and the Recording Industry Association of America have previously launched criminal and civil actions against Direct Connect operators. The MPAA said its actions targeted more than 100 server operators around the world. The U.S.-based actions are all civil lawsuits for now, while European actions include the threat of criminal penalties. The group did not provide information on specific legal actions. The group was joined at a press conference in Washington, D.C., by Travis Kalanick, the former Scour file-swapping service creator who now operates a legal peer-to-peer service called Red Swoosh, to talk about the authorized alternatives to unrestricted file-trading.

DeadMan2003	Date: December 14, 2004 @ 9:26 PM http://www.slyck.com/news.php?story=624 French police have at least temporarily shut down Youceff Torrents, one of the largest torrent sites and recently listed in Slyck�s Top 10 SuprNova Alternatives. Arjan, the site administrator, was given no warning. The first signs came Monday afternoon when the site went offline. The hosting company initially said it was due to an electrical fault. This morning, Arjan received and e-mail explaining that the servers had in fact been deliberately terminated and the police where on scene. Slyck spoke to a rather nervous Arjan, who explained that the police would find nothing on the servers but torrent files. He does not host any FTP servers or warez. Arjan does not live in France, or believe he has done anything wrong, but he is naturally apprehensive that the local police will make a visit to his door. He also remains defiant, saying that even if the French servers are shut down permanently, he will find elsewhere to host. Youceff has been struggling to gain more information due to lack of English speaking staff at the hosting company. At time of shutdown, Youceff Torrents was using 7 servers with a constant bandwidth usage of 18mbit. The servers, run by CTN1, where chosen for their price. The original American servers where shut down after too many DMCA complaints. UPDATE News.com are reporting that criminal actions have been filed against the owners of file sharing websites in Europe. A representative of the French government has said the operator of seven French based servers is still wanted by French police. Slyck has been unable to reach Arjan for comment.

DeadMan2003	Date: December 14, 2004 @ 9:30 PM http://www.wieringa-advocaten.nl/blog/nlblawg.php?cid=197#197 Translated BREIN and FIOD-ECD in action against edonkey portals Date: 14-12-04 By: Lex Bruinhof After a report by Brein the FIOD-ECD arrested 8 people today and confiscated 4 servers and 11 computers. The arrested people are alledgedly involved with 2 internet portals through which access is offered to files like movies, games and dvd's, which can be downloaded via the p2p filesharing system of eDonkey. Abroad there have been actions against these kinds of sites before. What is striking is that it is a criminal prosecution in this case. Stichting Brein has tried beforehand to get the sites taken down the friendly way. When those attempts failed Brein didn't start a civil case (like other copyright guardians have done in the past), instead Brein reported the case to the Justice Department. Breaking copyright law is after all not just an unlawful act in civil law, but also an act punishable by law. eDonkey works differently than Kazaa, where the "collectionmanagement" of the program is left totally to the p2p-network of connected computers. The searchfunction in eDonkey is managed via portals like those that are facing charges now. (note from the translator: this is incorrect, edonkey uses its own searchfunction, the portals are just a handy way to know what's worth downloading) Those portals in itself have nothing to do with the creators of eDonkey, but do offer the links that one can use to quickly get to where one can start downloading with eDonkey. The big question is of course if just offering a link of a portal site can be deemed relevant (or at least punishable) in the face of copyright law. FIOD-ECD claims in their press release, amongst other things, that it is illegal to "have in one's possession copies of copyright protected works with the objective of multiplying or spreading them". This is true, as long as those copies or the preading of them are unauthorised. But are we talking about "having in one's possession" here? That's going to be a tough not to crack for the criminal judge. In civil law the criterium was up until now that linking (or hosting) can be deemed illegal if access is offered to pages that are unmistakably unlawful. Is a portal site like the ones we are talking about a page like that? On may 12th of this year the Court in Haarlem passed judgment in a civil case that was sort of comparable with this one. That case was about a page where one could search for mp3's, seperately from a specific download program. The court was of the opinion that even though such a mp3-search engine made looking for mp3's on the internet a lot easier, it wasn't automatically the case that an mp3 file was directly transferred from the person offering the file to the user of the search engine. And so, according to the judge, there was no case of publication conflicting with copyright law. The judge also was of the opinion that offering physical means to facilitate a copyright protected publication in itslef was not a form of publication (this all in accordance with the European directive about copyright law in the information society). Even seperately from copyright law the judge still did not find the functions of the search page as unlawful, because the search engine could also be used for legal applications, like downloading mp3's for home use. Is such an mp3 portal fundamentally different from the portals that are targeted now? It appears to be that such a portal is completely geared to being used to facilitate the use of eDonkey. But is that unlawful? We shall see. It appears though that eDonkey users cannot disable the function that makes one offer the files to the network (like one used to be able in Napster and Kazaa). A downloader is therefore automatically also a future uploader, and whoever has read this weblog before knows that offering copyright protected files on the internet without permission is not allowed. perhaps this will prove an important issue.

CodeWarrior	Date: December 14, 2004 @ 9:34 PM "These people are parasites, leeching off the creative activity of others," said John Malcolm, the MPAA's director of worldwide antipiracy operations. They "serve as traffic cops connecting those who want to steal movies with those who have a copy and want to provide it." http://news.com.com/MPAA+targets+core+BitTorrent%2C+eDonkey+users/2100-1025_3-5490804.html?tag=nefd.lede

Diogenes2	Date: December 14, 2004 @ 10:10 PM "Previously, the MPAA had filed hundreds of suits against individual downloaders. The new actions against server operators come just days after the Supreme Court agreed to take up the landmark MGM v. Grokster file-sharing case. MPAA representatives said the timing of Tuesday's widespread action against BitTorrent servers was unrelated." Yeah, right; it was mere coincidence, uh-huh. Certainly NOT intentionally timed to help strenghen that file-sharing case with the Supreme Court; oh, no, never.

wet1	Date: December 14, 2004 @ 10:12 PM "These people are parasites, leeching off the creative activity of others,"... Is this the pot calling the kettle black or what?

goldenpi	Date: December 15, 2004 @ 4:27 AM There are always the overnet and kad networks, should enough ed2k servers go down to impair performance.

dogpile	Date: December 15, 2004 @ 12:07 PM Have all torrents move to China.

ticktock	Date: December 16, 2004 @ 11:50 PM which are the symptoms, which the disease? i'm sorry if i can't feel that the "music industry" has been mortally wounded or even temporarily damaged. is a cd a live performance? is a copy of a book the same as writing your own work of fiction? of course everyone here at this forum agrees more or less that information should be free and should be disseminated as desired. of course. But what would be the long term global effect of P2P and bittorrent users if allowed to escalate unchecked? strange that the internet and neural net learning circuits are becoming more and more similar.... it's similar to ridiculous arguements that there is such a thing as global warming and that we are all doomed... ever been to the tropics? life thrives there! heat and high humidity are what push life to its fullest potential. so even if global warming were a real thing, it would most likely be a great thing for life on earth. deserts and frozen wastelands are cute backdrops for books and movies, but they actually don't support much life and suck for humans. imagine that information technology reaches the point where the information is no longer in files, or stored on pieces of aluminum and silicon and plastic on your home computer..what if infomation is allowed to just circulate the earth in the ozone layer with some new type of technology, so that it is everywhere accessible all at once, replicating itself in simple atmospheric chemical reactions. or if you had several terabytes of organic hardware in your own body...the mpaa is obviously only protecting its own short-term ecomonic opression of the freedom of information. fuck them and download away...the advance of technology is driven by conflict, in the same way that evolution is driven by plagues and disease.