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
), 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.