RIAA and the MPAA Crosing the line!

Discussion in 'Green Room' started by yellotang, Aug 19, 2003.

  1. yellotang

    yellotang Guest

    Just got a call from my dad tonight.

    His Charter Cable internet service was cancelled because the MPAA and RIAA told Charter to pull his plug.

    According to Charter Cable Company, he was sharing a movie titled "Head of State". According to my father they told him that he was illegally sharing this file.

    He told me he has no idea what "Head of State" is, nor does he even know how to share files.

    Now, he is an elderly man who retired for many years. He is totally computer illiterate and has a problem turning on his computer let alone knowing how to swap files. He has no children living at home. Only his wife who is even more computer illiterate then he is. No one else has access to his computer except me and I have no reason to down load that junk.

    Charter told him that he was being sent a letter discussing the issue and that the RIAA and MPAA may be filing a suit against him.

    I feel that the subpoenas and the actions taken against ISP and there clients show how stupid and foolishly sloppy that they are getting. This has got to stop now! Our rights to privacy are being seriously stomped on and they are taking down anyone that they can, even the innocent people.

    Warning to all file sharers and those who don't.

    You Could Be Next!
  2. Tiesto

    Tiesto OSNN Addict

    He is probably an XDCC bot, has Head of State on his computer hidden somewhere and has no idea its there.
  3. yellotang

    yellotang Guest

    how do you take care of that?
  4. Geffy

    Geffy Moderator Folding Team

    United Kingdom
    check if there are any weird connections
    netstat -a

    then look for anything connecting to port 6666 or 6667 or something around that
  5. thebear

    thebear d(-.-)b

    Toronto, Canadia
    or counter-suit for privacy violations...since the suspected file wasn't there
  6. yellotang

    yellotang Guest

    don't mean to play stupid but how do you find out if something is connecting to port 6666 of 6667?
  7. yellotang

    yellotang Guest

    Thank you Enyo
    will do
  8. jonifen

    jonifen pffff...

    there was an XDCC bot on the main server where I used to work - I only found it because someone's internet radio upstairs was jumping, and I checked the netstat and found a connection to undernet irc...

    I found the bot in c:\windows\config\cache (if that helps at all)... the computer also had a process running named "srunner.exe" - all it took was a search on google to find it

    I just wonder how long it was there? I mean... as the machine is on 24/7, I'm very surprised there was no warez on the machine. Needless to say, I got rid of the bot, only to lose my job the following week anyway (but thats a different story)
  9. yellotang

    yellotang Guest

    Man, thats scary. And they hold those that were hacked accountable for that.
  10. Jahya

    Jahya Guest

    Most commonly, when a computer is hacked to be used as an XDCC bot on irc you will find multiple files in the /Windows/System32/Config - /WinNt/System32/Config or just in the system32 folder. Not to say it is limited to these folders, but this is the most common place b/c the average user will never ever access this folder, and often this folder is completely hidden (unless of course you disable hiding system files and folders). The primary goal of those hacking personal pcs, edus and corporate networks for use as xdcc bots is to bury the files so deep that they will not be found. What good is a bot that is going to be discovered?

    As for the legalities of what the ISP/MPAA/RIAA did... well this all remains to be seen. As I'm sure you are all well aware there is an ongoing war in the courts in regards to filesharing and what the copyright holders can actually do legally. At this point the war is at a stalemate, both sides have won minor victories, but as of yet no one has really come out ahead and again, as I'm sure you are all aware file sharing is still going strong (yes, there's been plenty of artcles and "propaganda speeches" saying that filesharing is decreasing, but it's not -- may be decreasing on Kazaa, WinMX, Grokster, etc. but that's because people are finding other means). All this is really just forcing technology to evolve faster. Every judgment against file sharing is forcing new file sharing technologies to emerge. In the end it is nothing but a vicious circle. Some file sharers go down, but the RIAA/MPAA never gain any ground b/c for every single one that goes down, 3 more are ready to fill that void using a new "untraceable" method.

    As for how they obtained this supposed file sharing "proof" against an elderly man who is virtually clueless about computers, well there's several options, most of which really border if not cross the border of privacy invasion and cyber breaking and entering. Most likely they will say they monitored the data stream, which is not technically legal. True they can montor data streams legally for many reasons, but to monitor the actual data being transmitted is, as of this moment, 110% illegal without a warrant (or unless it is specifically stated in a contract with the ISP).

    Another method being used are bots that are probing to find access to computers (at random to my understanding) then illegally entering your computer and checking the contents of your drive for copyrighted material. Of course, the flaw to this method is that people who have legit backups of CDs, DVDs, software, etc (which you have the legal right to have) are potentially targeted and ultimately could screw the copyright holder. Last time I checked, hacking in any form was still illegal, and thus this action could not possibly be legal, yet they are being able to use this info in court so it is a law only in name it seems (depending on who's breaking it I suppose).

    So to get to the point (as if I really had one :p ), demand proof from the ISP, demand to know how the information was obtained, demand to see the warrant that authorized the info to be gathered (if applicable) and most importantly, get a lawyer who specializes in internet laws and find out about your rights. Most likey your demands for info will not be met without a lawyer. In the end, if the info was obtained illegally or the info turns out to be false, sue. Lawyers aren't free and your time is money.

    On a personal note, I do not advocate file sharing (as a matter of fact, I hate P2P). Sure, I've done my share of it but if I like what I downloaded, I WILL and DO buy it. If I don't it's gone, deleted, see ya. The RIAA/MPAA are raping us all each and every time we purchase a CD or DVD, so IMO it's only fair I should be able to try before I buy. Considering the minimal cost of mass producing CDs and DVDs, even once you've included artists time, artwork, studio costs, point of sales markup, and general staff costs (not to mention the ignorant numbers of execs that need their chunk of change) the average CD (mass produced at 100,000 or more copies) need not cost more than $5 or $6 for a huge profit to be made and a DVD $10 - $12 (of course this all relies on selling a couple hundred thousand copies -- but in a country of millions of people this should not be an issue if there is any quality to the production -- not to mention much of it sells worldwide to billions of people, with that the extra cost of exporting add a $1 or $2). Yet a CD on average is $15 or more and a DVD is usually closer to $20 (excluding sales and new release prices). Why? up until a few years ago there was absolutely no reason for this other than greed. Now, every CD or DVD you buy, a portion of that profit is to fight the war on file sharing and the rest is just flat out greed.

    Well, anyway, sorry about the obnoxiously long post which has probably gone far off the course of this thread, but this subject gets me heated. It's all so pointless, petty and flat out stupid. If the major labels would just think about it and grasp the power of intenet sales, they could solve this problem by providing pay services, that if done right could make them more profits than they ever dreamed of. I would pay a reasonable monthly fee, even if there was a reasonable monthly download limit and I know tons of people who would do the same. Many independent labels have already grasped this concept and are making leaps and bounds from being a small label to becoming a well known and highly profitable label. All the while making better music/movies than 90% of what these major corporations try to push off on cosumers which is pure talentless crap.

    Again, sorry for the long post. Deep breaths and calming thoughts.
  11. Ramanuman

    Ramanuman Guest

    + Google Plex
  12. yellotang

    yellotang Guest

    Thank you for the great information. I ran those tests on my fathers computer and nothing is showing up. No XDCC bot files. No open 6666-6667 ports. No viruses. ran Adaware (up to date) ran Spybot (Up dated) added a new firewall to his computer and did a massive search files/folders included hidden and archieved files to try to find any file larger then 200megs. (figure a movie has to be atleast 200 megs) and Nothing shows up.

    Makes me wonder.
  13. muzikool

    muzikool Act your wage. Political User

    This is a very interesting issue yellotang. I'm sorry I can't be much help here, but I'm sure that everything will work out fine. Keep us updated here. :)
  14. yellotang

    yellotang Guest

    Sure Will.
  15. X-Istence

    X-Istence * Political User

    See, this is what gets me mad as well.

    Your pa is prob old enough to still remember that radio's had tubes in em that lit up like light bulbs.

    I think its unfair what they are doing, and how they are doing it.

    The RIAA can do what ever they want, they can scan my boxes, but all they will find is songs ripped from streams that any person in the world could listen to at any time.

    Its not 100% legal, but its also not 100% illegal, they couldnt sue me for the songs i have, since i obtained em in a way that anyone could obtain them in. I dont share them, and only have them for me to listen to.