Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Don't Forget: "Six Strikes" Starts This Weekend

Unknown Lamer posted more than 2 years ago | from the if-you-can't-win-in-court dept.

Piracy 298

Dr. Eggman writes "If you don't recall, then Broadband/DSL Reports is here to remind us that ISPs around the U.S. will begin adhering to the RIAA/MPAA-fueled 'Six Strikes' agreement on July 1st. Or is it July 12th? Comcast, AT&T, Verizon and Cablevision are all counted among the participants. They will each introduce 'mitigation measures' against suspected pirates, including: throttling down connection speeds and suspending Web access."

cancel ×

298 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Don't Forget: "Six Strikes" Starts This Weekend (3, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40503865)

It's the beginning of the end for the INTERNET.

Re:Don't Forget: "Six Strikes" Starts This Weekend (5, Insightful)

EdIII (1114411) | more than 2 years ago | (#40503957)

Hardly.

It's the beginning of mass amounts of hosted VPS/torrent solutions and SFTP traffic.

Laws have never once curbed popular behavior without huge losses of life and civil war. So until there is the decapitation, or drawn-and-quartered rule, I sincerely doubt behavior modification will be the outcome.

Trying to ban SFTP traffic is not going to work, and trying to play whack-a-mole with VPS/seedbox providers will be fruitless.

Re:Don't Forget: "Six Strikes" Starts This Weekend (1)

ls671 (1122017) | more than 2 years ago | (#40504165)

10*3600*24*28.5/8/1024
3005

If I am right, you can download 3005 GB a month on a 10Mbs connection.

Try to stay around 50GB a month and do not open connections with 4000 hosts simultaneously on a home plan and you should be fine.

That's what they want (5, Interesting)

betterunixthanunix (980855) | more than 2 years ago | (#40504167)

They would rather deal with online services than P2P. That's what this has been about this the beginning of this ridiculous situation. The old media barons do not want to see a world in which people can be both consumers and distributors of entertainment or software, because that turns their whole business upside down. Peer to peer networks, and yes, that includes the Internet itself, are the targets; they want this to look more like cable TV systems, where consumers have consumption devices and where distributors have to negotiate deals and fight things out in courts.

The RIAA and MPAA love playing whack-a-mole; they have decades of experience doing it, they have laws on their side, they have public sympathy on their side. Suing an service provider off the face of the Earth doesn't really get the public angry, and it can result in that service provider making a deal that rakes in cash. Suing some college kid, some working class parent, some old computer-illiterate grandmother -- those things get the public angry (which is only tolerable up to the point where they start voting for less industry friendly politicians), they have no chance of producing a profitable deal, and they involve a party that has little money to give.

Re:That's what they want (2)

kheldan (1460303) | more than 2 years ago | (#40504223)

they want this to look more like cable TV systems

Well, then in the end they won't get any money from me. If the Internet turns into that, then I'll just say "fuck this" and cancel it. I don't have cable TV now (by choice) and I certainly had a life before the Internet. I don't think I'm alone in this sentiment, either. If they really want to kill the Golden Goose, go ahead and let them try, but I don't think so.

Re:That's what they want (3, Insightful)

betterunixthanunix (980855) | more than 2 years ago | (#40504287)

  1. That is terrible -- the Internet is supposed to be for us, that is, for the computer users of the world. We are supposed to have a network where we can communicate freely, where there are no borders or region codes or deals to negotiate. If the copyright industry is allowed to hijack our system, the answer should be to make a new Internet.
  2. By the time the Internet looks like cable TV, living life without an Internet connection will be very difficult. Banking, shopping, communications (voice, video, text) will all basically involve the Internet. Most people want the superbowl and will not boycott the Internet if it becomes the only way to get their entertainment, even if they are losing the freedoms the Internet was supposed to provide (which most people have not really had to chance to enjoy, due to the generally poor understanding of computers).

    Let's put it this way: how many people will give up on Facebook in the Internet-as-cable-TV scenario?

Re:That's what they want (0)

mcavic (2007672) | more than 2 years ago | (#40504435)

We are supposed to have a network where we can communicate freely

You don't get to avoid your country's laws just by creating a computer network. If a terrorist group wants to use the network to plan attacks, and if I want to use it to sell drugs to kids, is that okay? Just saying. There is a line somewhere, and the governments are going to set the line for us - it's the definition of a government.

Re:That's what they want (1)

cbiltcliffe (186293) | more than 2 years ago | (#40504567)

The Canadian music industry negotiated the "blank media tax" back when people were taping from cassette to cassette. They got a sweetheart of a deal, in which I pay the music industry to record my own music that's copyrighted by me. In exchange, the public can copy music for personal use without breaking copyright. That's how it works in Canada.
Since the rise of p2p, the same music industry is trying to sue people for downloading music. Unfortunately for them, the way the blank media tax loophole is written (which was probably written by the music industry itself), downloading by p2p counts as copying for personal use, but computer hard drives don't count as blank media. Various courts in Canada have ruled this way.

So, when they stopped getting fantastic gains from their purchased laws, they desperately tried to get it changed, That didn't work, so they tried to get a DMCA equivalent passed. Huge public outcry stopped it. So they tried again. Again, public outcry. So they tried again....etc.
Eventually, after a LOT of attempts, they got a weakened version through.

So the laws were not even in place when the network was created, at least in Canada.

Re:That's what they want (1)

mcavic (2007672) | more than 2 years ago | (#40504791)

The blank media tax is a brilliant idea in my opinion. But yes, it seems to have been written for physical media and doesn't extend very well to the Internet.

Re:That's what they want (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40504627)

and if I want to use it to sell drugs to kids, is that okay?

Drugs! Children! The horror!

Can you try to create a less retarded example? For the record, I don't really care.

There is a line somewhere

Not for me. Censorship shouldn't exist. Not even "for the children" or "to stop the terrorists." Fuck off.

Re:That's what they want (1)

mcavic (2007672) | more than 2 years ago | (#40504847)

Censorship shouldn't exist.

We're not talking about censorship; we're talking about law enforcement. In the US and probably a few other countries, there's a difference between the two.

Re:That's what they want (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40504725)

If a terrorist group wants to use the network to plan attacks, and if I want to use it to sell drugs to kids, is that okay?

Yes. You have a far better chance of catching them if you don't drive them underground.

Re:That's what they want (5, Interesting)

mysidia (191772) | more than 2 years ago | (#40504849)

That is terrible -- the Internet is supposed to be for us, that is, for the computer users of the world. We are supposed to have a network where we can communicate freely

It will be when someone develops a system kind of like FreeNet or ToR that actually works well for content distribution and consumption without revealing responsible IP addresses, doesn't require any advanced technical knowledge to publish and update content, is very fast, scales very well, and replaces BitTorrent and other protocols, which only provide file transfer, not content discovery and easy publication of media.

Re:That's what they want (1)

nickmalthus (972450) | more than 2 years ago | (#40504827)

In the popular media we always hear about how negative workers unions are on the "free market" but those same pundits never say a word about corporate trade unions. If union busting is so great for the economy then lets bust up the corporate ones as well.

Re:Don't Forget: "Six Strikes" Starts This Weekend (4, Funny)

HornyBastard (666805) | more than 2 years ago | (#40504457)

"So until there is the decapitation, or drawn-and-quartered rule"

We're talking about pirates here.
You have to keel-haul them.

Re:Don't Forget: "Six Strikes" Starts This Weekend (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40504503)

Laws have never once curbed popular behavior without huge losses of life and civil war.

Uh, prohibition?

(Spare me any response equating the resulting rise in organized crime to "huge" losses of life and civil war.)

Re:Don't Forget: "Six Strikes" Starts This Weekend (1)

KDR_11k (778916) | more than 2 years ago | (#40504607)

I think his point was that prohibition didn't actually stop people from drinking, just from doing so legally.

Re:Don't Forget: "Six Strikes" Starts This Weekend (3, Informative)

laederkeps (976361) | more than 2 years ago | (#40504651)

How about a response about the resulting organized crime [b]with the purpose of skirting the prohibition[/b]?
It didn't so much change the alcohol culture as drive it underground.

Re:Don't Forget: "Six Strikes" Starts This Weekend (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40504591)

Equal opportunity and racial vilification laws are one example of popular behaviour curbed by laws.

Re:Don't Forget: "Six Strikes" Starts This Weekend (1)

ls671 (1122017) | more than 2 years ago | (#40504005)

As a batter, I kind of like the idea. As a pitcher, I want 8 balls.

Re:Don't Forget: "Six Strikes" Starts This Weekend (1)

snspdaarf (1314399) | more than 2 years ago | (#40504129)

"Walk proud, Is671!! Walk proud!"

Re:Don't Forget: "Six Strikes" Starts This Weekend (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40504095)

Blame Canada as 1st July is Canada Day!!!
Happy Canada Day and 4th July to Americans!

Captcha: decree

USA bunch of fkin nazi fuckers (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40504349)

It's the beginning of the end for the INTERNET.

How can a tiny industry worth only $10b, create laws that govern freedoms.

Everyone, tell your parents,grandparents, they are stupid fuckers for voting for evil pricks.

Lets see the bigger porn industry create legistlation that porn must be on freetv, no censorship.

Fightclub time!

Re:Don't Forget: "Six Strikes" Starts This Weekend (3, Funny)

Chelloveck (14643) | more than 2 years ago | (#40504381)

It's the beginning of the end for the INTERNET.

Film at 11. I'll post a torrent.

Re:Don't Forget: "Six Strikes" Starts This Weekend (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40504597)

Only your U$A Internet... The world COULDN'T GIVE A SINGLE FUCK.

Regards,
NobodyCares.

Freenet is still here (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40503873)

I guess most people will probably still avoid it until their first strike, but Freenet's still alive and shuffling many TB of data between the nodes without the possibility of monitoring.

https://freenetproject.org/

Re:Freenet is still here (3, Insightful)

betterunixthanunix (980855) | more than 2 years ago | (#40504089)

without the possibility of monitoring

Hm...that's an interesting assertion...perhaps you meant "hard to monitor" or "I cannot see how this will be monitored," but unless you would like to point to a proof of hardness i.e. that either in an information theoretic sense or under some common cryptographic assumption it is hard to track Freenode transfers, I would not stake much on Freenode. It would not be beyond the RIAA or MPAA to hire some cryptanalysts to develop methods of attacking the security of Freenet, nor would it be beyond them to set up malicious Freenet nodes for that purpose.

Re:Freenet is still here (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40504143)

" It would not be beyond the RIAA or MPAA to hire some cryptanalysts to develop methods of attacking the security of Freenet, nor would it be beyond them to set up malicious Freenet nodes for that purpose."

Sounds to me like you have a ball problem.

As in : you don't have any.

Re:Freenet is still here (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40504321)

tried it. Instant fail. it requires java.

Re:Freenet is still here (2)

MightyYar (622222) | more than 2 years ago | (#40504411)

Take a stand: I don't run ANYTHING that eventually translates to machine code.

To make my post actually relevant, I will add that it runs fine with Diablo, in case you have some objection to Oracle and not just an objection to a language.

Re:Freenet is still here (1)

mcavic (2007672) | more than 2 years ago | (#40504463)

Letting other people surf through my IP? Doesn't sound like a good idea to me.

a minority opinion (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40503877)

This graduated system actually sounds like a big improvement over their old policy where some college kid would be downloading and sharing 1000's of songs, and then get hit by a subpoena by the RIAA's lawyers.

Now, they send out warnings and follow them up before taking further action. So the infringer gets feedback in time to change their behavior before they get served with a big lawsuit.

Re:a minority opinion (4, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40503909)

I definitely agree. Now rather than just having no chance to perfect your strategy for getting away with torrenting, you get 5 before you're fucked.

Re:a minority opinion (5, Insightful)

martin-boundary (547041) | more than 2 years ago | (#40503951)

Except this "feedback" bypasses the courts, bringing posse justice to suspected "infringers".

The old system of lawsuits is better for victims of the RIAA, as their rights are respected. The only reason this is being promoted as "positive" is because the vultures need to move onto a new strategy to keep ahead of the judges, as the courts are growing wise to the years of abuse of the law.

Re:a minority opinion (2)

Reschekle (2661565) | more than 2 years ago | (#40504027)

Is that really true? Technically yes, you have your chance at getting due process before the courts.

If you're innocent: you're going to end up having to pay a lawyer and deal with the massively expensive legal system.

If you're guilty: you'll more than likely settle out of court for 3-4 grand, which is likely way more than the supposed losses suffered by the recording industry for your individual act of downloading and sharing.

If you end up in court in either situation and lose, chances are they will go for the full penalty, which can be in excess of $100,000 all for a single album. Sorry, I don't have the court cases at hand here, but I remember Slashdot covering some of these cases where the recording industry was awarded extremely ridiculous sums of money in comparison with a reasonable person's account of their actual damages.

The legal system is stacked against the common person in these situations.

The "6 strikes" system is problematic, yes. But it may end up saving a lot of people from having their wallets drained.

Re:a minority opinion (5, Insightful)

Stiletto (12066) | more than 2 years ago | (#40504215)

The legal system is stacked against the common person in these situations.

This is the same justification proponents of "binding arbitration" use. Surprise! arbitration is also stacked against the common person, and so will this gentlemen's agreement between huge corporations. At least, in theory, you have a fighting chance in the legal system. In this system (and in arbitration), you're punished, period.

Rule of Thumb: Any agreement or contract that you were not part of writing is designed to screw you.

Re:a minority opinion (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40504037)

I guess we'll just have to bring justice to the ISPs and RIAA/MPAA.

Fire bomb a few offices, torch some infrastructure, and assassinate their lawyers and they might change their tunes.

Re:a minority opinion (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40504087)

The old system of lawsuits is better for victims of the RIAA, as their rights are respected.

*chortle*

Like Joel Tenenbaum and Jammie Thomas-Rasset.

Re:a minority opinion (1)

fufufang (2603203) | more than 2 years ago | (#40504239)

Perhaps they should have a new set of law, in which if one's right to freedom of expression is to be restricted, it needs be brought to a court, like habeas corpus, except it is for your right to freedom of expression.

Re:a minority opinion (4, Insightful)

Charliemopps (1157495) | more than 2 years ago | (#40504043)

You're foolishly misguided if you think the RIAA is going to stop suing people that have no way to defend themselves. If anything they will use these warnings against these people.

Re:a minority opinion (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40504081)

So in return for the ISPs agreement to be enforcers, the RIAA signed a binding agreement not to send further subpoenas and settlement notices? Yeah, no. Instead of getting hit with settlement extortion, alleged infringers now lose net access and get a settlement notice. The threshold for the subpoena is not any higher, so it is nonsensical to think the ISP will cut anyone off before that happens. Also, unless the ISP conducts its own investigation, the first thing it will hear of alleged infringement will be from the RIAA.

Re:a minority opinion (1)

cheekyjohnson (1873388) | more than 2 years ago | (#40504801)

alleged infringers

This is the best part of all. Who needs evidence or due process? They're guilty until proven innocent!

Re:a minority opinion (2)

betterunixthanunix (980855) | more than 2 years ago | (#40504097)

Is there some reason to think that they will not continue to bankrupt college students?

Re:a minority opinion (3, Insightful)

paleo2002 (1079697) | more than 2 years ago | (#40504275)

I suspect most people will "change their behavior" after the warnings or speed throttling by switching ISP's.

Perhaps once telecoms begin to lose customers as a result of being MAFIAA enforcers, they'll decide to side with their customers and more modern copyright laws.

Re:a minority opinion (1)

KingBenny (1301797) | more than 2 years ago | (#40504509)

quote from ta : "In other words, nothing will happen under the program. People who receive more than 6 warnings are removed from the system. They wont receive any further warnings or punishments and are allowed to continue using their Internet service as usual. "
?
also, the way the post refers to 'suspected pirates' seems to be a bit off ... if they just monitor bittorrent swarms they have to be actively downloading it as far as i know, if all they can get at you with is your ip it's a total waste of money, i'm guessing tax money, as in not funded by the lobby itself
a shady strategy, but if it calms the vultures and hyenas down i'm all up for it. I just wonder how many torrents they will be monitoring at one single time

Hacktivism at its finest (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40503885)

So this is the time we should go break into powerful people's wifi and download high profile torrents and get their connections shut down. It would be funny if every high powered person in good ol' United Socialists of America was without internet because they were cutoff.

Re:Hacktivism at its finest (-1, Troll)

History's Coming To (1059484) | more than 2 years ago | (#40503907)

Yeah, because they'll fall for that six times in a row...

(I know, I know, and I'll even cite the number of UK politicians who's phones containing state secrets were hacked because they left the voicemail password set as 0000.)

And yes, I agree with the above poster who believes that eventually stopping people pirating stuff will kill the internet, oh yes indeed, none of it will be any use if you can't download Buffy for free. If the ISPs start hammering people simply because of a Gb torrent which turns out to be a linux ISO then there's a problem, but if they can legitimately show piracy was going on then fair enough. Six strikes is easily enough to give people the hint. If they don't like it they're free to rent their own backbone connection.

Re:Hacktivism at its finest (4, Insightful)

Deekin_Scalesinger (755062) | more than 2 years ago | (#40503917)

Come on now, really? I'm a card carrying member of the EFF (truly) but that's a little much. That's like saying "let's plant some dope in his car and then call the cops because we don't like him!"

Activisim is one thing, setting someone up for legal issues is another, in my book.

Re:Hacktivism at its finest (5, Interesting)

LordLucless (582312) | more than 2 years ago | (#40504133)

Well, it depends. If the target was a person who'd been instrumental behind, say, mandatory sentencing for drug possession, I'd be all for it. It's basically a way of showing the people who make these decisions the practical ramifications of them - because they either cannot understand basic logic, or don't care because they don't think it will apply to them.

Likewise, if this was targeting, say, a participating ISP's CEO, or the family of an RIAA exec, I'd be all for it. They're introducing a process that punishes people while circumventing due process. Let's see it bite them in the ass a few times, like it will everyone else.

Re:Hacktivism at its finest (1)

K. S. Kyosuke (729550) | more than 2 years ago | (#40504513)

That's like saying "let's plant some dope in his car and then call the cops because we don't like him!"

Well, it has always been my understanding that regardless of your involvement in it, that person would be in the US guilty of the crime of "possession", whatever that word is actually supposed to mean.

Re:Hacktivism at its finest (2)

JockTroll (996521) | more than 2 years ago | (#40504023)

Yeah, because the powerful people abide by the same laws and rules as Joe Expendable. Not one influent and wealthy person will ever be touched by those laws, ever. They belong to a different caste, the Ruling Elite. You want to make a difference? Blow shit up.

Re:Hacktivism at its finest (2)

Deekin_Scalesinger (755062) | more than 2 years ago | (#40504061)

You want to make a difference? Blow shit up.

Mother of God - did the Anarchist movement have a power breakfast meeting this morning? You guys sure are up early...

Re:Hacktivism at its finest (1, Interesting)

TFAFalcon (1839122) | more than 2 years ago | (#40504249)

Just get a few Microsoft employees to pirate stuff on their work computers. After all, corporations are people too.

Where's the money? (5, Insightful)

amoeba1911 (978485) | more than 2 years ago | (#40503899)

The problem is that MPAA/RIAA somehow think they're going to get more money from what they think are "consumers". The overwhelming majority people they're going after have no plans on giving their money to media distributors because they either don't have any or know better. Yet, they continue to waste their resources going after these "pirates" - who aren't really pirates because they're not profiting from their activities in any way.

The distributors are always complaining about how they're barely making ends meet.... perhaps if they didn't pay themselves millions of dollars they wouldn't have any problems? As I see it, they're just greedy assholes. They should do us all a favor and roll over and die. In a world where cost of distribution is very close to $0, there is no need for a digital media distribution company.

Re:Where's the money? (2)

Alarash (746254) | more than 2 years ago | (#40504153)

Actually you still need people with money to finance new artists and bands, advance the studio recording fees, and make them known to the public. This is not debatable. The problem is that all the MAFIAA don't do it for the love of music (and enough money to pay themselves a good salary - I have no problem with that), but for the love of money. And there is no end to the love of money for the sake of making money, and that is where the problem lies. This is not limited to the music industry, it's a sickness of our "modern" society.

Re:Where's the money? (1)

firex726 (1188453) | more than 2 years ago | (#40504439)

Except that I think you heavily overestimate how much money is really needed.

I can rent a professional studio for several hours at a cost of a couple thousand dollars. I can also buy consumer grade recording equipment that sounds on par with the professional grade to the ear, for far less then the millions they front.

Their money goes into Hollywood Accounting. Ever notice how bands are always broke unless they become ultra popular (Beatles, Rolling Stones, etc...).

Re:Where's the money? (1)

Alarash (746254) | more than 2 years ago | (#40504611)

Oh yes I agree. But how do you get a couple thousand dollars in the first place? It might hard to finance that, on top of the equipment you have to buy. You could self-finance yourself by crowd-funding, I guess.

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for self-produced music. I'm very happy Metallica is considering this for their next album for instance, or how Radiohead did for their latest album. Authors shouldn't get less than the 10% they get now when one of their track is sold.

The money is in "services" (4, Interesting)

betterunixthanunix (980855) | more than 2 years ago | (#40504259)

The copyright lobbyists live in a world of services, a world where people are either consumers receiving service, or service providers who provide service. They love this world, because copyright fits very naturally into it -- the copyright holder can negotiate with the service providers, whose business interests compel them to enter into profitable deals. That is why they love the cable TV system -- the consumers are just leaf nodes, whose money can simply be siphoned upward to the businesses running the show.

Compare this to the Internet, where peer to peer networking thrives (and which is a peer to peer network itself). Sure, there are service providers online, but the truth is that unlike the cable TV system, the Internet does not require service providers to distribute entertainment -- anyone with an Internet connection can be a participant in entertainment distribution. Suddenly, the consumers are not just passive receivers whose wallets can be raided; they are participants in the distribution of entertainment, and they are not all party to an explicit deal with the copyright industry. They might receive their entertainment without having to pay for it, they might distribute the entertainment before or after the industry would have preferred, they might make entertainment available that embarrasses the industry.

The industry does not know how to rake in billions of dollars in profits in such a scenario. Thus they have simply resorted to attacking peer to peer itself. As long as people are only able to receive their entertainment from a distribution service, the industry is happy. They'll play that game, they'll sue and bargain with file sharing websites, because they understand the model and the websites have more to lose than some college kid. The endgame is for the Internet to become a fancy cable TV system, where there are channels, distribution regions, disputes between networks and copyright holders that leave consumers without entertainment, and most importantly, consumer systems will just be passive receivers.

Six strikes? Just a way to scare people away from peer to peer models, until there are enough TPMs and DRM systems to ensure that peer to peer networking is no longer possible.

Eternal September (2, Funny)

lobiusmoop (305328) | more than 2 years ago | (#40503901)

It's finally over! Hooray!

Except... (2)

betterunixthanunix (980855) | more than 2 years ago | (#40504357)

Instead of Usenet or the Internet returning to the days of being networks for hackers and intellectuals, we are entering an even darker age. Now, when we are online, we need to make sure that we are encrypting everything, that our certificates are valid, that we are using an anonymity system, that our firewall is configured to block ranges of IP addresses known to be used by certain organizations, and that we stay up to date on the latest methods of attacking all these systems. The Internet is a depressingly hostile network these days, and this only worsens that situation.

One word for ya: Streamripper (5, Informative)

Teresita (982888) | more than 2 years ago | (#40503905)

1. Record innernets radio with streamripper, a free CLI app ported for Unix and Win32.
2. See how streamripper lays all the songs in your folder nice and neat with all the MP3 tag information intact.
3. Sort the folder on size in your favorite file manager and delete all the sub-megabyte commercials.
4. See how RIAA doesn't have a clue what's going on because it's like taping your songs on a boom box.
5. ????
6. Profit!

Streamripper + Grooveshark (4, Informative)

Bananatree3 (872975) | more than 2 years ago | (#40504011)

Loadup your favorite songs with Grooveshark, queue Streamripper and voila. MP3s magically appear in your folders! No torrents required.

please ignore the above comment (4, Funny)

Bananatree3 (872975) | more than 2 years ago | (#40504025)

It doesn't exist. It's not accurate, and therefore completely invisible. The above pixels are blanked out and your eye does not read them. Nothing to see here, please move on.

Re:Streamripper + Grooveshark (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40504373)

Or . . . just pay a measly $5/mo for mog.com - duh.

Re:One word for ya: Streamripper (1)

Lumpy (12016) | more than 2 years ago | (#40504131)

Problem is it's all low grade bitrates only useful for the $3.99 earbuds. Private sharing groups are still where it's at for FLAC or super high bitrate high end ripped music.

Re:One word for ya: Streamripper (5, Informative)

Teresita (982888) | more than 2 years ago | (#40504263)

You know what they do to music these days? First of all, they use auto-tune to make it seem like Lindsey Lohan can actually stay on key, then they record the track so hot if you import it into Audacity it looks like a solid blob. All those square waves, that's clipping, but it makes the "artist" sound "edgy". When all the popular music is recorded like that, it doesn't matter if you get it at 64 kbps and listen with Dollar Store earbuds. So I go USENET for lossless, and to grab entire albums, including the cover art.

Re:One word for ya: Streamripper (2)

realityimpaired (1668397) | more than 2 years ago | (#40504309)

Problem is it's all low grade bitrates only useful for the $3.99 earbuds. Private sharing groups are still where it's at for FLAC or super high bitrate high end ripped music.

You probably already have all of the high end ripped music that will ever exist... there's no point in using a high end codec on a recording that was compressed during the sound mixing stage.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loudness_war [wikipedia.org]

Re:One word for ya: Streamripper (1)

Gaygirlie (1657131) | more than 2 years ago | (#40504399)

1. Record innernets radio with streamripper

What, someone still uses these kinds of things with ads and music you can't skip if you don't like it? That's like SO 90s.

Fuck Off RIAA/MPAA (3, Insightful)

RedHat Rocky (94208) | more than 2 years ago | (#40503911)

To: RIAA/MPAA assholes

I've been less and less likely to go to movies, thanks dudes.

Being specific: the idea that y'all think movies are a good way to strip cash from consumers to your pockets is annoying. The idea that you deserve to do so no matter what is plain offensive.

Only other places need freedom (4, Insightful)

al3 (1285708) | more than 2 years ago | (#40503913)

So I guess the government's position that access to the Internet is as important as freedom of speech only applies to communist countries http://articles.cnn.com/2011-02-15/politics/clinton.internet_1_internet-freedom-repression-expression?_s=PM:POLITICS [cnn.com]

Re:Only other places need freedom (-1, Troll)

longk (2637033) | more than 2 years ago | (#40503959)

Freedom of speech allows you to say whatever you want about the government. It does not allow you to say whatever you want about others and certainly does not in any way apply to piracy.

Re:Only other places need freedom (3, Insightful)

al3 (1285708) | more than 2 years ago | (#40503983)

Banning people from the Internet will take away "the freedoms of expression, assembly, and association online" in an overbroad and potentially inaccurate attempt to punish piracy.

Re:Only other places need freedom (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40504013)

Free speech doesn't just apply to speech about the government.

Re:Only other places need freedom (1)

EzInKy (115248) | more than 2 years ago | (#40504021)

In your world is it okay to speak out against a government that stifles speech against others or piracy?

Glad I have RCN (3, Informative)

Immerial (1093103) | more than 2 years ago | (#40503927)

Sorry for all those folks that don't have any other option! This also the reason I keep turning down all those 'amazing' Comcast deals... look --> a whole year at $1/month. Yeah, great deal until RCN is out of business and I don't have another option.

Re:Glad I have RCN (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40504649)

Or CenturyLink/Qwest.

The Star-Spangled Banner (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40503935)

O'er the land of the free(?) and the home of the brave?

First strike... you out (-1, Flamebait)

spaceplanesfan (2120596) | more than 2 years ago | (#40503947)

We are the slashdot trolls, my (just made, surprise butt fuck) friend.
And we keep on trollin' till the end.

We post goatse [goatse.ru] links.
Natalie portman and hot grits.

No time for lusers (Linux users),
because FreeGayOS (FreeBSD) rules!

Bittorrent (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40503991)

I didn't see this answered anywhere. I use bittorrent to download and seed Linux distros and the Wikipedia for schools disc. How much will this pointless crack down impact my legal and legitimate use of this service?

What copyright owner (2)

tepples (727027) | more than 2 years ago | (#40504045)

According to FAQ #4 "How does the system work?" [copyrightinformation.org] , the process begins when a copyright owner reports your IP address and date to an ISP. To determine how much your service would be affected, I first need to know what copyright owner would report you. Or did you expect it to be something mickey-mouse like The Tetris Company complaining about the inclusion of Quadrapassel or tetris.el in a Linux distro?

Re:Bittorrent (2)

Reschekle (2661565) | more than 2 years ago | (#40504049)

Should have zero impact in theory.

The RIAA/MPAA are paying contractors to join bittorrent swarms and collect IP addresses of users sharing infringing content. They don't own the copyright to any Linux distro or Wikipedia distro so they should not be initiating an enforcement action against you for this.

Of course it's entirely possible that they can screw up and get their torrents confused and report everyone who is sharing a 'Wikipedia' repository as somebody sharing the latest Bieber album. In that case, you pretty much have zero recourse because there is no built in appeals process. But you have six strikes at least...

Re:Bittorrent (1)

CohibaVancouver (864662) | more than 2 years ago | (#40504187)

I didn't see this answered anywhere. I use bittorrent to download and seed Linux distros and the Wikipedia for schools disc. How much will this pointless crack down impact my legal and legitimate use of this service?

Zero. I've only ever torrented once, and afterwards I got a message from my ISP stating that I had breached copyright. The message listed the exact file - "Hellboy 2," If memory serves. So they knew exactly what I had grabbed. Torrents will live on - Downloading copyright content on torrents may start to fade...

Re:Bittorrent (3, Insightful)

betterunixthanunix (980855) | more than 2 years ago | (#40504297)

How much will this pointless crack down impact my legal and legitimate use of this service?

You will receive a letter, and then you will call your ISP, demand that they reduce your strike count because you were just downloading those Debian disks. The ISP will insist that their system is perfect, until you speak to a manager who will reduce your strike count, but only in one of many databases that only synchronize increases in the count. Eventually you'll be in court, suing your ISP, only to be told that your service agreement says that you have no legal recourse.

Hahaha (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40504211)

Enjoy that U$A citizens.

Hahaha.

The creative industry is being creative. (5, Insightful)

fufufang (2603203) | more than 2 years ago | (#40504217)

In the land of the free, the creative industry finds creative ways to restrict people's freedom. How ironic.

Make your vote count DON'T BUY SONY (5, Informative)

deanstyles (2614649) | more than 2 years ago | (#40504229)

I stopped buying anything with the Sony label years ago when they won a $250,000 suit against a 14 year old girl and her single mother on a disability pension for downloading a few songs. Unfortunately I already used up my vote so I couldn't stop buying when Sony when they recently jacked up prices on Whitney Houston music to cash in on her death. Start with the worst offenders in the RIAA/MPAA...put them out of business...then pick off the next. What they win in lawsuits they'll lose in sales. Sony used to be an innovative company with brilliant engineers and reliable products...then they fired their engineers and replaced them with lawyers...they figured they could make more money being copyright trolls...tell them they were wrong...vote with what you buy.

Re:Make your vote count DON'T BUY SONY (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40504277)

I'm going to buy extra Sony to offset your boycott of Sony.
 
Go fuck yourself, neckbeard. I hope your ass gets sued and you go to prison and get the AIDS rape.

Re:Make your vote count DON'T BUY SONY (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40504519)

Also if you buy music even if it's "indie" make sure they aren't using Sony for distribution. A lot of corporate music is getting "indie-washed" these days where they put the artist on a seemingly small indie label but really it's owned and/or distributed by the majors. These days I try to just get music people are willing to sell at "name your price" on bandcamp. Seriously, there is so much amazing truly independent music on bandcamp and soundcloud that you should never have to give up any cash to Sony. Also when it comes to video game consoles the PS3 and Vita seem nice but no way I'm getting anything from Sony even if it's a different division. If you need a Japanese gaming fix get a Wii U which is going to have chips that are actually made in America, no, not just designed, actually fabricated in upstate New York by IBM! Now Nintendo isn't the friendliest company to indie developers (basically they are not welcome on the platform) but on the other hand Nintendo never lobbied for any bogus laws in our country, even in the 80s when they had a monopoly.

VPN (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40504235)

Can anyone recommend me a VPN service hosted in Venezuela or any other country on hostile terms with the US?

err (1)

kelemvor4 (1980226) | more than 2 years ago | (#40504279)

If my ISP were to throttle my service to a level below what I am paying them for, I would simply switch providers. They're not my parents, they're not part of the government. They either provide the service I'm paying for or I will go to a competitor and pay their competitor. I don't have to worry about being in breach of a contract because if there was one (which there isn't) then they'd be the ones in breach. The only way we are going to stop the MPAA and RIAA is to take to the streets in mass, and not in some silly "occupy walstreet for no reason" type protest, either.

Re:err (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40504393)

Where do you live that you can "just switch providers"?

In America, each region typically has one broadband provider which is given a monopoly from the local government to operate, essentially, has a public utility. When you're throttled or kicked off of that one provider, your option is to sell your house and pack up your things and move to another city or even another state.

No more sharing (1)

Jetra (2622687) | more than 2 years ago | (#40504289)

Well, I can tell that most people who use YouTube will probably be on the top of RIAA's Most Wanted.

I have a good 6 strike methodology (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40504295)

Strike 1) Head (to stun, so that they have an idea what it is actually like being hit by a lawsuit)
Strike 2) Right hand (to break the joint and disable mobility, to give them something to think about ever time they sign a document in the future)
Strike 3) Right kneecap (break, so that they remember what 'freedom' is)
Strike 4) Left kneecap (break, see #3)
Strike 5) Ribcage (break, preferable multiple ribs, so that they remember with every breath what freedom was like)
Strike 6) Pepper spray in the eyes and mouth (to remind them what freedom of speech and mobility)

A list of names of people and where to find them would help. Be sure to include all RIAA/MPAA/related entities in all countries affected

Have A Nice Day

Much Ado About Nothing (0)

rsmith-mac (639075) | more than 2 years ago | (#40504367)

Let's be frank here, guys. The only people this is going to affect are those users who are using BitTorrent to commit copyright infringement. Use your brain and don't use BitTorrent to commit piracy, and you'll be fine.

Re:Much Ado About Nothing (4, Interesting)

cheekyjohnson (1873388) | more than 2 years ago | (#40504759)

Nothing to hide, nothing to fear. Just like you have nothing to fear from the TSA or the Patriot Act! Those in power can never make mistakes or do anything wrong.

nice excuse (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40504379)

to throttle and or cut-off those customers who use a bit too much of the bandwidth they paid for .....

PIRATE PARTY (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40504497)

Yes. There are many technical ways of circumventing the MPAA/RIAA's monitoring of your behaviour online. This will become a cat-and-mouse game.

The international Pirate Party movement is the ONLY option to actually counter the Copyright Industry, their lobbyists, and the politicians in their pockets. Many US states already have a chapter. Become a member, or at least donate. Oh, and what's more important: talk to a lot of like-minded family/friends/colleagues and make sure everybody goes out and votes for them, when a candidate has been fielded.

It will be going that way regardless, it'd be nice to have it now and not have to wait 20-30 years for the "old typewriters" to die off.

Privacy tax time (2)

xtal (49134) | more than 2 years ago | (#40504633)

Go with a anonymizing VPN in another jurisdiction, and send a big fuck you to the snooping crew.

I recommend/use IPredator but there are others. (I am not affiliated)

Effectively renders all of these measures moot and gives you a great defense if someone raises a flag.

Fuck that... (0)

MacGyver2210 (1053110) | more than 2 years ago | (#40504683)

Nazi faggots. The lot of them.

Real pirates have a main trunk line.

Meh (1)

J'raxis (248192) | more than 2 years ago | (#40504865)

Remember to enable encryption in your torrent client. Use TOR for web downloading (Don't [torproject.org] use it for torrents, unfortunately).

And I'm sure within a year or less there'll be even better solutions for evading the eye of your ISP. Prohibition didn't stop alcohol sales, it just drove it underground. That'll happen here, too.

Switch to a different ISP and stop funding these companies. Don't complain about "monopolies"---none of these ISPs have a monopoly in providing Internet services; they have at most a monopoly in the specific kind of service they provide (e.g., only DSL provider in town, only cable company). Satellite is available everywhere, as is dialup. In many places, if Verizon is providing DSL service, there are also often other small companies providing DSL as CLECs [wikipedia.org] . All that these big ISPs may have "monopolies" on is speed or convenience, and if you keep paying for their services, you're part of the problem.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>