×

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!

BSA Reacts to 'New' BitTorrent

CowboyNeal posted more than 8 years ago | from the usual-response dept.

The Internet 326

An anonymous reader writes "It seems the Business Software Alliance isn't afraid of the new, tracker-less BitTorrent beta. While it concedes it will have to 'regroup', Tarun Sawney, BSA Asia anti-piracy director, said BitTorrent files could still be identified. 'BSA has traditionally sought the assistance of those hosting the actual pirated files. With or without the tracker sites, someone still hosts the infringing files.'"

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

326 comments

Copyright? (0)

bitchell (159219) | more than 8 years ago | (#12587569)

Are but the torrent files do they actually in fringe copyright??

Re:Copyright? (4, Informative)

leonmergen (807379) | more than 8 years ago | (#12587587)

Are but the torrent files do they actually in fringe copyright??

It isn't the .torrent files they're talking about, it's the actual torrent data. They're probably just joining a tracker, and see which ip addresses try to contact their host... not sure if it is enough proof in court, but I can still see they're not scared of this indeed.

Re:Copyright? (2, Insightful)

real_smiff (611054) | more than 8 years ago | (#12587609)

exactly, although (whatever they say) they must be gutted that they won't have single points to shut down many users with.

Re:Copyright? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12587709)

Agreed, and what they usually really want to do is to shut down the sites. It will be harder now since anyone can easily spread torrents now without bothering with setting up servers. Suing individuals were always a far less efficient method of doing this.

Re:Copyright? (2, Insightful)

bmongar (230600) | more than 8 years ago | (#12587690)

IF an agent of a copyright holder (BSA) makes the work avaliable for public download is it illegal to download it? I mean by knowingly making it avaliable on a public network they are giving public permission to copy it.

Brad

Re:Copyright? (1)

xmodem_and_rommon (884879) | more than 8 years ago | (#12587765)

not necessarily. If I write a book and leave the manuscript on a street corner and you find it, does that give you the right to copy it? (i know, bad analogy)

but by offering it for download, they would be inducing you to commit a crime. There is a word for this: Entrapment

Re:Copyright? (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12587941)

If I write a book and leave the manuscript on a street corner and you find it, does that give you the right to copy it? (i know, bad analogy)

Very bad analogy. It is not generally expected that anyone finding a manuscript on a street corner will attempt to publish it. It is generally accepted that someone finding a link to download a file they want will click on the link.

Correct analogy: if you give me a copy of your book, I have the right to accept the gift, and you can't turn round and accuse me of theft.

Re:Copyright? (1)

xmodem_and_rommon (884879) | more than 8 years ago | (#12587993)

you're right, i should have put a bit more thought into that analogy.

But yours isn't much better (or possibly its incomplete). You can accept the gift, but you can't (legally) turn around and engage in wholesale copying of my copyrighted work unless i give you permisison.

Re:Copyright? (3, Informative)

NewStarRising (580196) | more than 8 years ago | (#12587899)

I may be wrong, but isn't it the UPLOADER (distributer) that is commiting the offence?
If someone who owns the copyright to a material is allowing it to be distributed, then there is no offence.

So what? (4, Informative)

CoolVibe (11466) | more than 8 years ago | (#12587582)

BitTorrent was never designed to anonymize. It was designed to distribute the load of hosting a file. A lot of hoopla about a non-issue.

Re:So what? (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12587600)

Well, there is always i2p, which Azureus is prepared for anyway. Needs a bit of config, is all.

I2P (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12587663)

Bittorent can prolly be run on top of i2p or tor anyway.

Why should jerks be allowed to see what I'm doing?

BSA?!? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12587740)

if (strcmp(szBSA, "Boy Scouts of America")) {
downloadPron(ALL); }
else {
downloadNull(); }

Re:So what? (2, Informative)

w3weasel (656289) | more than 8 years ago | (#12587878)

BitTorrent was never designed to anonymize

For help with that... try this [methlabs.org]

Vive la BitTorrent! Morte du le BSA!

Rodi - an alternative to BitTorrent? (2, Interesting)

TheHidden (885493) | more than 8 years ago | (#12587969)

Found this on Planet Peer: http://board.planetpeer.de/index.php/topic,829.0.h tml [planetpeer.de] Rodi is a new developmental P2P network that is currently in testing. What makes Rodi unique? Many features, such as IP-spoofing for anonymity and packet-mimicking, so the P2P traffic can appear as one of many different internet traffic patterns - such as HTTP, FTP, etc - that are less likely to get blocked or throttled by an ISP's packet shaping. Unlike traditional proxied (very slow) anonymous networks (Freenet, Mute, Ants, Winny, etc) the use of IP spoofing can allow high-speed full-bandwidth downloads while keeping the uploader's true IP address hidden from the downloader.

Correct (3, Informative)

hotdiggitydawg (881316) | more than 8 years ago | (#12587588)

They're right, this changes nothing. At the end of the day someone is still hosting the infringing material, and they're in the firing line.

Re:Correct (2, Insightful)

Soybean47 (885009) | more than 8 years ago | (#12587738)

So, what? They're going to sue everyone who's seeding copyrighted material, and force them to stop? The problem with that is, legal proceedings are slow enough that by the time they go through, those particular seeders would likely have already stopped anyway, and been replaced by new seeders.

It makes the system more fault-tolerant.

Re:Correct (1)

hotdiggitydawg (881316) | more than 8 years ago | (#12587865)

Who needs to sue? Copyright infringement is a criminal offence, not civil. They may choose not to go after you for loss of earnings, but rather simply collect enough evidence to link the crime and the offender, and pass it on to the relevant authorities as a criminal case. Much easier to do that in a bulk scale, and let the justice system deal with the millions of new cases. And they can take as long as [insert appropriate Statute of Limitations for your jurisdiction here] says they can, to do it...

Re:Correct (1)

Metasquares (555685) | more than 8 years ago | (#12587954)

It's a lot harder to prove a criminal case ("beyond a reasonable doubt") than a civil one, not to mention the negative publicity that sending "12 year-olds" and "grandma" to jail for downloading files would generate.

Who is sharing... (1)

NaNO2x (856759) | more than 8 years ago | (#12587596)

Now they are just going to go straight to the lists of people who are downloading and randomly pick IP addresses to follow.

Fry the BSA members in the Electric Chair (3, Insightful)

Cryofan (194126) | more than 8 years ago | (#12587597)

These BSA dictators are paying off politicians to create corporate feudalism. Just like it was in the Middle Ages where private power, those with the most gold, OWNED the humans beings within a certain geographical area, so too has the BSA BOUGHT a part of us. For those BSA funders, and politicians who have enabled this, this is treason, IMHO.

All the CEOs who fund the BSA should be tried for treason, and if convicted, placed in the electric chair, and electrocuted to death. And do the same for their lapdog politicians who give them this power.

Hmmm ... (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12587642)

"I find your ideas interesting and would like to subscribe to your newsletter." - HJS

Re:Fry the BSA members in the Electric Chair (4, Insightful)

KiloByte (825081) | more than 8 years ago | (#12587653)

Yeah, but note whom would have to try them for treason... uhm, isn't that the politicians themselves?

Democracy would fix this just fine. Except for the fact that neither communism nor corporationism don't have anything in common with democracy.

Re:Fry the BSA members in the Electric Chair (1)

Cryofan (194126) | more than 8 years ago | (#12587693)

Yeah, but note whom would have to try them for treason... uhm, isn't that the politicians themselves?

Yeah, whatever. But every task needs to start somewhere: an acknowledgement of the problem, a statement of a solution to solve the problem, etc.

WE NEED TO HANG (or fry) SOME POLITICIANS. That should be really obvious by now. So, if we need to do that, we need to SAY SO, first. I am saying so.

If you agree, then say so. We can go from there. But first we need to acknowledge the problem, and state our goals to reach a solution for that problem.

Re:Fry the BSA members in the Electric Chair (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12588089)

It's quite obvious that we need to punish politicians, for the myriads of crimes they commit. And I'm not only thinking about IT here - many politicians in the Western world are obviously guilty of major corruption. But the party system protects them - your only practical alternative is to put another crook in.

Re:Fry the BSA members in the Electric Chair (4, Insightful)

osgeek (239988) | more than 8 years ago | (#12587706)

Lighten up, Francis.

Software and other content developers trying to protect themselves from pirates is hardly Feudal serfdom.

It's more possible than ever to collect movies, music, and software (that you never paid for) than ever before. Expect corporations to overreact to that theft as much as possible and for equity imbalances to result.

If you were as vocal about protecting the rights of content producers as you are about protecting the rights of "the people", maybe there would be more balance in the situation.

Those of us in the middle are willing to pay for what we use and ask to be paid for what we create. As usual, you warring factions at the extremes make it difficult for the more reasonable people to just live their lives in peace. Nice job.

Re:Fry the BSA members in the Electric Chair (5, Insightful)

shani (1674) | more than 8 years ago | (#12587813)

Most people either download music, and/or see nothing wrong with it. The "extreme" that you mention is the norm.

It is not possible for every activity to result in somebody getting paid. Neither is this a reasonable goal.

There were no "content producers" for most of human history, yet people made music, works of art, and so on. It will be different, neither better nor worse, if the world returns to a state where people are not paid for making digital recordings.

Re:Fry the BSA members in the Electric Chair (1)

Cryofan (194126) | more than 8 years ago | (#12587847)


Lighten up, Francis.


"Don't ever touch me, or I'll KILL YOU!" /grin...great movie!


If you were as vocal about protecting the rights of content producers as you are about protecting the rights of "the people", maybe there would be more balance in the situation.


Yeah, there ya go! And if the antelope greased himself with lard before being eaten by the lion, it would really help the lion swallow that darn antelope. THe antelope should really be more considerate....

You listen jane (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12588074)

Your 'idea' of selling software is just that.... and Idea. As much as it is my idea to give my software, and the source away for free. YOU lobby the polititions, and make it illegal for people too oppose YOUR ideas. I don't. You speak of rights, but yet, you won't acknoledge the rights of others.

Thats my stand.

Re:Fry the BSA members in the Electric Chair (0)

black mariah (654971) | more than 8 years ago | (#12587757)

How fucking pathetic is YOUR life that you actually take this shit so goddamned seriously? Treason? Are you honestly that fucking stupid? Do you even know what treason IS? You and other idiots like you are the ones that need to be electrocuted. Preferably through a metal rod inserted into your urethra.

Re:Fry the BSA members in the Electric Chair (1)

Cryofan (194126) | more than 8 years ago | (#12587803)

Treason? Are you honestly that fucking stupid? Do you even know what treason IS?

Treason is defined in the Constitution as aiding or abetting an enemy of the USA. "Enemy" can be interpreted in more than one way. I see the big corporations as our greatest enemy. You put ME on the Supreme Court bench, indict these sellout politicians for treason, and I will vote to fry these politicians who sell out our country to the corporations.....

Re:Fry the BSA members in the Electric Chair (1)

slack_justyb (862874) | more than 8 years ago | (#12587817)

No this is just capitalism at work. Basically, you don't like what is going on, therefore, you should start your company, get support from others who share your goals, and then setup some sort of group call the anit-BSA (or whatever).

Yeah that's all crap. By the time you get about 25% done some company will just buy you out or you'll be too old to really care anymore.

The thing that always surprises me is that people are actually mad that this thing is going on. Rich people (however defined by a nation's society ) have always had more power than the poor.

For many reasons I won't just say, "get used to it," but a lot of people are just so unmotivated to do anything about it. So this patteren will continue until something rubs a majority of the lowwer class the wrong way. Because, it seems to me, no one does anything until someone jams a hot poker up their ass.

Take away my freedoms... Ok.
Take away my beer... I'll kill you all!

Re:Fry the BSA members in the Electric Chair (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12587918)

Yeah! let the BSA fry for not allowing gay scout masters in! er.. wait, wrong BSA...

Re:Fry the BSA members in the Electric Chair (1)

Cryofan (194126) | more than 8 years ago | (#12588075)


No this is just capitalism at work.


And what I am suggesting is DEMOCRACY at work. Ain't it a bitch?


Basically, you don't like what is going on,


You are correct, sir!

therefore, you should start your company, get support from others who share your goals, and then setup some sort of group call the anit-BSA (or whatever).


No, what I am going to do is start a movement to CORRECT our political culture. It has happened many times in the past. Heads rolled. Leaders got their attitudes adjusted. And things improved. We need to teach our leaders a lesson and adjust their attitudes. If you agree, then join me. If not, then get the fuck outta the way....

seems to me (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12587603)

that the BSA are just being niggerly with their definition of "legal". with many kinds of licenses such as gnu and gpl alything could theoretically be legal to download with torrents. information wants to be free, they should stop opposing it.

misspelling (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12587616)

Gosh, I hope you intended to say niggardly rather than niggerly.

Re:misspelling (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12587656)

i meant what i said.

- CmdrTaco

Shared responsibility (5, Interesting)

arikb (106153) | more than 8 years ago | (#12587606)

The question is, can they prove someone has the infringing file, if they only transmit PART of the file?

What bittorrent is about is being able to send very small but verifiably authentic parts of the file - but is that enough for them to prove the person has the infringing content?

My guess is that this is going to be made into law in the US in the near future - that if they get a single BitTorrent packet from you that belongs to an infringing file, it's enough to convict you of a crime and haul your behind in jail.

-- Arik

Re:Shared responsibility (5, Insightful)

syntap (242090) | more than 8 years ago | (#12587659)

Let's say you get four friends and you each photocopy a fifth of the new Harry Potter book when it comes out, then stand outside and each sell your part for a dollar, in effect letting one person collect a fifth from each of you and get the whole book for $5 instead of the $12 or whatever the retail price will be.

Is it your contention that by making only a part of a work available that you and your friends aren't infringing on a copyright? A "small but verifiably authentic" part of a file is content infringement just as much as a significant portion of a book would be.

Two dilemmas (4, Interesting)

KrunZ (247479) | more than 8 years ago | (#12587755)

But what if you and your 500,000 friends stand in line and each hold a letter and each will show it to people for $12/500,000 per letter. Are you infringing on the copyright?

What if you and your 10,000 friends each stand a in line and each of you are holding a paper citing a line from the book. Are each of you just using your citation rights?

Re:Two dilemmas (1)

Threni (635302) | more than 8 years ago | (#12587781)

> But what if you and your 500,000 friends stand in line and each hold a letter
> and each will show it to people for $12/500,000 per letter. Are you infringing > on the copyright?

Sounds like conspiracy to me. This is not an offence I'd wish to get charged with.

Re:Two dilemmas (1, Funny)

Nytewynd (829901) | more than 8 years ago | (#12587818)

I only have 2 friends, and one doesn't know the alphabet... You must be quite the party animal to have 500,000 friends.

Re:Two dilemmas (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12587905)

I have 50,000 friends for a short while each time I get an unreleased film over Bitorrent!

Re:Two dilemmas (1)

drgonzo59 (747139) | more than 8 years ago | (#12587934)

I brought up this argument in the discussion about Bush signing a law that would jail someone distributing even a single pre-release. My suggestion was that if someone would want to distribute pre-releases but not distribute any one single file, then they should distribute parts of it. Obviously the original distributor will have to distribute the whole file to bootstrap the process, but then the file is divided into smaller pieces and nobody makes available to the public the whole file, just a segment of it. The smallest segment is 1 bit and the largest is the whole file without 1 bit. I was wondering if there is segment size in between that is still feasable and yet not large enough for anyone to say that you are sharing such and such file and are guilty.

Re:Two dilemmas (2, Insightful)

1WingedAngel (575467) | more than 8 years ago | (#12588098)


> But what if you and your 500,000 friends stand in
> line and each hold a letter and each will show it
> to people for $12/500,000 per letter. Are you
> infringing on the copyright?


Wouldn't that be you and 25 friends? I mean, I missed the part where there are 500,000 letters in the english language

Re:Shared responsibility (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12587828)

And if you couldnt read a word of those photocopies unless you had all the parts? What would you have then? Completely useless data that has the potential to infringe.

Re:Shared responsibility (4, Interesting)

Qzukk (229616) | more than 8 years ago | (#12587662)

can they prove someone has the infringing file, if they only transmit PART of the file?

Yes, because the clients broadcast how much of the file they have.

If you don't think thats enough for a warrant, go down to the local police station and start shouting that you're carrying a pound of crack.

Re:Shared responsibility (1)

FidelCatsro (861135) | more than 8 years ago | (#12587909)

Wouldnt that be like carying a pound of a component in crack ,They couldn't do anything till you have the whole thing put together .They would probably keep tabs on you though and wait till you have finished then rush in .

Re:Shared responsibility (1)

Cyram (262342) | more than 8 years ago | (#12587957)

A pund of crack is still functional to a user. Part of a file isn't as functional to a user though. A better analogy might be that someone is trying to sue you for stealing their car when all you have is their hubcap.

Sure, the hubcap is stollen, but it's not the whole car.

Re:Shared responsibility (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12587968)

If you don't think thats enough for a warrant, go down to the local police station and start shouting that you're carrying a pound of crack.

Your not saying you are carrying "a pound of crack". You are saying I am carrying 30 mg of ingridiant X that can be used to create crack.

Re:Shared responsibility (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12588018)

Actually, it'd be more like the CRACK would shout that I'm carrying a pound of crack.

Or, even more similar, the baggie announces that it has a pound of crack inside, and that it can (and needs to) hold another pound before it's full.

In any case, just walk on by, because it's your paranoia. That's not a cop shop, it's a laundry mat... And those are the voices in your head. Be cool, man. Be cool.

Re:Shared responsibility (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12588043)

I'm sure they'd appreciate the gesture overhere.

I'm from the Netherlands btw.

Re:Shared responsibility (1, Funny)

Neil (7455) | more than 8 years ago | (#12587664)

If someone connects to your BT client using the protocol they can find out which pieces you are offering to your peers.

I don't see that it makes much odds anyway: if the file is copywrited work, and you don't have have permission to redistribute that work, then copying parts of it is just as much an infringment as copying the entire file.

Re:Shared responsibility (1)

salgo (322587) | more than 8 years ago | (#12587668)

A single packet? That could be anything. They'd need more than that surely.

Re:Shared responsibility (1, Funny)

daikokatana (845609) | more than 8 years ago | (#12587711)

The question is, can they prove someone has the infringing file, if they only transmit PART of the file?

IANAL, but thinking like one would lead me to say yes.

Suppose the BSA/RIAA/MPAA/whoever succeeds in downloading 1 part of a total of 500 from your IP address. They could then automatically assume that a) you have that part on your disk, b) you were downloading that same file and c) you would end up with the same file they were downloading which you could share later on.

Even if you were to argue that, after downloading, you would disconnect and stop sharing, you would still have had the chance to upload 99% of the file in question. Don't mess with lawyers on these issues.

Re:Shared responsibility (1)

leuk_he (194174) | more than 8 years ago | (#12588016)

IANAL,

That is the problem. If you want do defend yourself you might want to hire a lawyer, who is more expensive than the settelement the bsa might offer to a typical file-sharer.

Re:Shared responsibility (1, Funny)

void dummy() (885218) | more than 8 years ago | (#12587778)

Whats about the million ip packet, which are misrouted. Whats about dynamic ips? If i request something and disconnect, probably someone else get this package.

Re:Shared responsibility (1, Funny)

tankd0g (875636) | more than 8 years ago | (#12587829)

They have yet to prove anything, it doesn't stop them from sueing, despite having never won a case, it's still effective against those few sites their "experts" pick out. It seems a site has to be nearly as well known as google before it pops up on their radar however, which suggests to me the guy looking is not especially skilled. I once got a letter from a lawyer for Oakley Sunglasses for deformation of their product from a 3 year old reply to a post that they printed out from the google archives. Oakley sunglasses are still polycarbonate garbage that break if you look at them wrong, by the way.

Re:Shared responsibility (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12587876)

I would have thought that at the moment you would be in breach of copyright if you pirated part of a copyrighted work. Otherwise you could simply throw away or rewrite one page of a book and then resell the result safely.

Re:Shared responsibility (1)

caluml (551744) | more than 8 years ago | (#12588079)

I'm sure that you can find small enough strings in any file.
My old sig used to be: grep "meaning of life" /dev/urandom. (It never did find the answer though.)

Arrrgh! (5, Funny)

ale3ns (453301) | more than 8 years ago | (#12587612)

Shiver me timbers!We can just bury the torrent files and make a map!BSA's having the Davies now! Arrrgh!

Trackerless BitTorrent will never work (1, Insightful)

timecop (16217) | more than 8 years ago | (#12587636)

See, the problem is, BitTorrent has been originally created to distribute large files efficiently.

There's been plenty of legal use, I've downloaded slackware ISO's, funny spoofs of warez groups from Sony's www.welcometothescene.com website, and I download updates to my legally owned copy of X-Plane using BitTorrent.

On those downloads, I've never got less than 200-300k/sec, and I had no problem connecting to the official, legal, and stable tracker.

This whole trackerless bullshit (new BT beta as well as "new" distributed tracking in Azureus, was created for ONE purpose only - to distribute ILLEGAL content.

Legal trackers don't go down. How many times did you try to download Slackware 10.1 ISOs and the tracker was down? Never. But if you go look at your favorite torrent pirate site, how many torrents on there are hosted off some dweeb's DSL line at home? Probably 50% or more. What happens when BSA/MPAA/RIAA/*AA comes in and takes away his PC? Tracker goes down, oh noes, piracy cannot continue.

So this "solution" to a non-existent problem will simply promote piracy using BitTorrent, and sway it from the original goal of distributing large amounts of data.

But the real problem starts is when everyone (read: my ISP, their upstream provider, etc) will be told by BSA/MPAA/etc that "BitTorrent in any shape or form is illegal". They will shape down my downloads, and i'll be downloading slackware 11.0 ISOs at 5k/sec. THAT would bother me, and piss me off, espeecially because I couldn't give two shits about pirated american TV shows, and a few dweebs that do, would be ruining a good software/data distribution method for ALL of us.

So much better than the usual GNAA nonsense (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12587772)

Timecop - Your parent post is so much better than the GNAA trolls and flamebait I am used to seeing from you! Thank you for the insightful comments.

I agree that BT use for legal distribution is in danger of being lumped in with illegal file sharing activities. Seems like the way to fight it is to encourage more legal uses of BT.

What if BT had soem new flavor that allowed one to connect only with a password/authnetication? This could allow BT to spread to pay-per-download services like iTunes Music Store or other on-line software vendors.

If not, then atleast deliver Windows XP SP2 or Norton virus updates over BT. It would save the software vendors on burst download bandwidth costs too!

Re:Trackerless BitTorrent will never work (5, Insightful)

Alioth (221270) | more than 8 years ago | (#12587777)


This whole trackerless bullshit (new BT beta as well as "new" distributed tracking in Azureus, was created for ONE purpose only - to distribute ILLEGAL content.


No, that's not true. There are plenty of reasons for having a trackerless torrent system - it allows people who don't have access to a server that can provide a tracker (such as bloggers, or those with GeoCities sites) to host large files without waxing their bandwidth limits. Bloggers can now easily publish their home videos, for example. There are substantial non-infringing uses for trackerless torrents.

Re:Trackerless BitTorrent will never work (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12587793)

Smug, uptight, holier than thou fuck...with gnaa in your email no less. And you think all ISP's are going to suddenly throttle their bandwidth at the whim of the **AA. And you don't seem to realize that not all ILLEGAL in the US content is ILLEGAL content in all countries, that the US is not the entire fucking internet and that even if it is ILLEGAL in one country maybe it shouldn't be (China). Worry a little less about the letter of the law and more about the spirit fool.

Re:Trackerless BitTorrent will never work (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12587915)

Honestly, we can be Holier Than Thou and US-centric since this is about protecting American intellectual property from people who apparently don't have enough intellect to come up with their own.

Re:Trackerless BitTorrent will never work (1)

WhatAmIDoingHere (742870) | more than 8 years ago | (#12587845)

How many times has the Tracker for Fedora gone down because of a /. post saying "Here's a Fedore Torrent?" Every single time. /. takes out Trackers when they give torrent links.

What about power outages taking out the tracker?

Re:Trackerless BitTorrent will never work (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12587856)

MOD PARENT UP

This is the first time I have to agree with timecop, the new torrent system will ONLY be used to distrobute illegal content.

Half Life 3 Announced! [value-software.com]

Re:Trackerless BitTorrent will never work (1)

jascat (602034) | more than 8 years ago | (#12587971)

I've seen numerous trackers down for various different OSS projects. Trackers go down just like DNS, web and email servers. This is a redundancy solution should a tracker become unavailable. Don't condemn a feature as something only used for piracy when it can be used in plenty of other situations.

Most of the warez, music, etc, that I have seen use only a couple of non-US hosted trackers. Hate to break it to you, but the BSA/MPAA/RIAA/US Government have no jurisdiction over them.

Too Simple (4, Insightful)

Morosoph (693565) | more than 8 years ago | (#12587990)

What you're not accounting for is those torrents that haven't been posted because the legitimate distributer of material had nowhere to put up a tracker. Certainly, one can always pay money for a permanent host and find somewhere, but someone with an account that is free with their broadband connection is that bit less likely to publish. With this change, when fully seeded, they can turn off their home machine.

So I suspect that you're wrong. By making publishing easier still, more will be able to put stuff up on their site that they couldn't before. True, most people lacking in resources will in this context be pirates, so the proportion of illegal use will go up, but that is a side-effect of enabling your average Joe to publish where they couldn't before, meaning that the quantity of legitimate use will also go up.

Re:Trackerless BitTorrent will never work (1)

ashridah (72567) | more than 8 years ago | (#12588071)

[i]Legal trackers don't go down. How many times did you try to download Slackware 10.1 ISOs and the tracker was down?[/i]

Is that a trick question?

Re:Trackerless BitTorrent will never work (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12588081)

A proud, law-abiding BitTorrent user? You sir, are an annecdote.

You are probably out-numbered by the amount of people who upload copyrighted works on Kazzaa, who own the copyright.

You are probably outnumbered by the number of rogue P2P nodes set up by the [MP|RI]AA to spam the shit out each network.

You are probably outnumbered by the number of people who acquire the express written consent of the NFL before recording a game.

You are probably outnumbered by the number of people who inquire about lisencing the 'hyperlink' patent from BT before throwing up a webpage.

You are probably outnumbered by the number of people who have paid for a license to sing 'Happy Birthday' at their kid's party.

So this "solution" to a non-existent problem will simply promote piracy using BitTorrent, and sway it from the original goal of distributing large amounts of data.

If it wasn't for all this "piracy" you would never have heard of BitTorrent, much less use it for as many "legal" activities as you boast.

Re:Trackerless BitTorrent will never work (2, Insightful)

springbox (853816) | more than 8 years ago | (#12588174)

If you think the intentions of creating a distributed tracker are purely for piracy then I think you've missed the point. It was to make transfering files via BitTorrent more accessable to a wider audience who don't have access to a dedicated tracker. Of course it will be abused. The current version of BitTorrent is abused already.

Megnet links (1)

EdZ (755139) | more than 8 years ago | (#12587637)

Why not just take magnet links to the next level: Allow anyone with the torrent to send it to anyone with the magnet link. that way the only way to curb the spread is to shut down every site that posts a line of text, or hope that a search function doesn't get integrated.

fuck 4 Gnaa (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12587638)

your sp4re time gig in front of brain. It is the Stagnant. As Linux Software lawyers

A question about incomplete files (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12587640)

When I download pirated stuff via BT I disconnect as soon as I am done as well as throttle outgoing connections. (call me a leech, whatever, I am one)

Since I never share even the quantity of information in the file, is there sort of a legal loophole there if I were to get caught. For instance could a defense such as "I only shared 100megs of a 500 meg file" be applied. It is like taking a book, ripping out 80% of it and giving the other 20% away. Or taking a movie, ripping 20 minutes of it and giving it away.

I realize the infringement is there but since the total piece of work is not distributed, it is a lesser crime, like aiding in infringement?

Thanks

BSA Reacts to 'New' BitTorrent (4, Funny)

gowen (141411) | more than 8 years ago | (#12587671)

Today the released a statement saying : Why should it bother us? We manufacture classic motorcycles [wikipedia.org] .

Re:BSA Reacts to 'New' BitTorrent (0)

Silver Sloth (770927) | more than 8 years ago | (#12587981)

There only interested by files which
  • Vibrate
  • Leak oil
  • break down when it's wet
and these new Japanese files are not a threat to our business

bit torrent?? (1)

sakura the mc (795726) | more than 8 years ago | (#12587675)

why cant people use winny? as long as you dont post hashes of files on the bbs, your chances of being identified are low. i would love to hear slashdot tell me why winny sucks. the people that actually do know what it is, anyway.

I2P (2, Interesting)

sbrown123 (229895) | more than 8 years ago | (#12587684)

I2P can do bittorrents. Unlike magnetic links, the original file is hidden behind a series of tunnels. Theres some encryption in there too for good measure. Check it out at www.i2p.net.

Re:I2P (0, Flamebait)

ControlFreal (661231) | more than 8 years ago | (#12587770)

Please refrain from mentioning I2P on /. until such time that the UDP transport is fully implemented. Now, with the TCP transport in place, I2P is essentially thread-limited (2 threads per connection) to about 250-300 nodes. Once UDP is in place, the threading issue goes away, and the network will support more users (2 threads for N nodes).

Luring people to I2P now is not useful for development, and not useful for the new people joining: there's hardly anything to be found there yet.

When I2P is ready, the creator will probably arrange a /. announcement. But for now, don't join it yet, and don't announce it here. Thanks.

Why does the Boy Scouts of America care? (-1, Offtopic)

nberardi (199555) | more than 8 years ago | (#12587719)

Why does the Boy Scouts of America care about BitTorrent? :)

So, in real time we hash the payload to a (3, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12587723)

particular IP with that IP for disassembly at the other end. Whammo, proof of DMCA violation on the part of anyone who comes after your ass.

DMCA violation trumps copyright violation any day.

Re:So, in real time we hash the payload to a (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12588112)

Don't be touting this stupid shit, it's simply untrue. DMCA doesn't protect infringers any more than trying to hide your IP.

The BSA, Microsoft and the definition of Extortion (4, Informative)

NZheretic (23872) | more than 8 years ago | (#12587725)

Re:The BSA, Microsoft and the definition of Extort (1)

Alamar3 (882922) | more than 8 years ago | (#12587936)

Unfortunately, "extortion" is not treated by its exact definition in a Court of Law. If it were, taxation would also be illegal (after all, money is being demanded from you with the threat of imprisonment if you fail to comply).

So at the moment, certain forms of "extortion" are legal. Not *Just*, mind, only legal. Until a paradigm shift occurs in the mindset of the general population ("hey, it can't be one law for some people and another for everyone else - that's unjust!", "can a legal system that upholds contradictory practices ever be just?", etc.) this sort of argument will continue to carry little weight.

After all, if it's happening to lots of people, it's got to be legal, right?

Blaiming Technology is fruitless. (5, Insightful)

jellomizer (103300) | more than 8 years ago | (#12587783)

Sure you can blame BitTorrent for piracy problems you can probably even go and make it illegal to use in most countries. But it wont stop the piracy. They will make an other program that does it differently. Technology moves a lot faster then the legal system. If they really want to cut down on piracy they should figure out why people pirate materials.

Things like Price. $100 and up is a lot of money for the average home user. Money that can be used for car payments, paying Rent/Mortgage. And paying $100 on a product you don't even know you really want or will use for only a couple of months can be a big waist. $25-$85 is the normal sweet spot for what people are willing to pay for most software.

Things like convenience. Going to the store and finding the product that you need now. Or going online and filling out all your personal information and getting placed on the stupid mailing lists and then paying for the product. Or go and get a pirated version with no questions asked.

Finally no real good reason to buy. When you buy the programs at the store you no longer get useful documentations like the good old day you just get the media and sales stuff on other programs the company makes or install directions in 1000 languages. I wish every program came with a manual the explains all the features in it, and a real paper manual not a PDF or html documentation where it is more difficult to flip to some page and find a cool feature.

Stop blaiming people who make the tools that make our lives easier the companies to think about making our lives easer,

Re:Blaiming Technology is fruitless. (1)

Overzeetop (214511) | more than 8 years ago | (#12588051)

Yes, the cost of software is generally out of line with the return for a home user. Business users gain far more for the use of software. Unfortunately, there's no way to distinguish the usage. Worse yet, as a business user, I'm loath to drop a large sum of money on a program unless I know it will work, and will provide a return. 30 day free trials? Sorry, there are times when I get busy and can't even try a program within 30 days...sometimes 180 days wouldn't be long enough to find the time to use it. Some individual packages of software for by business cost more than 4 months salary for the person using it - and another 1 month of salary every year for updates. And I still have to pay to train them to use it.

Heck, a full suite of licenses for a single user might cost as much as their annual salary. Add two to four month of total training time to get them to learn the programs, and I'm looking at a huge cost before I even bill a single penny.

You hit the nail on the head with the documentation. Some of the "popular" programs don't come with anything more than the online help file, prettied up on glossy paper. If I'm goingt o pay $500 (or $5,000) for a software package, I'd damned well better get a three volume set detailing the software - installation file locations, registry keys, system variables, every command, a full tutorial, and examples.

And, yes, I download packages off of usenet. I've had some sit for over a year before I got a chance to try them out and learn them. And, yes, I've bought the retail version once I decided it was in my interest. And, I'm sad to admit, I've "waited" to buy certain programs until they showed a positive return. As soon as I could bill more than the software was worth, I bought it. I like to justify it as saying I'm taking advantage of an unintended 0% extended term financing, with a money back guarantee.

Re:Blaiming Technology is fruitless. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12588151)

Yeah...i know what u mean. if i saved that much money, i'd blow it all on junk food, which would certainly lead to big waist.

sought the assistance of??? (1)

sd.fhasldff (833645) | more than 8 years ago | (#12587858)

> BSA has traditionally sought the assistance of those hosting the actual pirated files. So that's what they're calling it these days. I guess "suing the ass off" has lost its appeal.

Fear? (2, Funny)

otter42 (190544) | more than 8 years ago | (#12587887)

Why should they be so scared of it? Is it made to attack them? Is the stated goal of BitTorrent to attack incessently, to give no quarter to the BSA?

Or are they just self-rightious overreacters that think that everything technological that doesn't come from them is a threat to their god-ordained, constitutionally protected business model?

fr1s7 psot (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12587908)

chaanel, 7ou might formed his own

Trackers won't get hosed - Will Swarms Balkanise ? (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12587959)

This has nothing to do with Piracy, it just alieviates the scaling botlleneck that was the tracker.

A more interesting question might be will this lead to other problems as swarms split and fragment. You may end up joining a tiny swarm cut off from the main swarm and thus get no bandwidth.

Or stuck in a swarm with no seeds.

Bram is very Clever though and I believe he has thought of this - can someone explain it to me though?

Bittorrent is designed to scale well and to ease the load on the Seed.
The problem was that the tracker did not scale well, even though it is a small file, it gets communicated with reguarly and just doesn't scale, popular files take down trackers.

So trackerless trackers simply allow better scaling and ease publication - so I would say that this innovation is more for legitimate files running on indiviual sites rather than Advert funded Warez trackers.

The myth of Internet anonimity has allowed an awful lot of fools to be caught. Naughty Bittorent swappers only have security through numbers.

How about underground fanzines which publish Movies as UUENCODED ASCII which is then typed in or OCR'ed - these could be published as poetry and protected as Free Speech. ;-)

Thanks for the free advertising guys. (-1, Flamebait)

tankd0g (875636) | more than 8 years ago | (#12588113)

Bram Cohen's advertising budget for Bittorrent - $0 RIAA,MPAA,BSA,OMF advertising for Bittorrent - Priceless (Exceeds $20,000,000) Thanks for the free ride, you are some damn useful tools.

Re:Thanks for the free advertising guys. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#12588140)

Try a break some time.

It is good news (1, Interesting)

Orion Blastar's Psyc (885504) | more than 8 years ago | (#12588172)

for those who don't want to be tracked and want privacy. The BSA is a bunch of whiners anyway. Piracy helps promote the software, and if people like it, they can buy a real copy.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

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>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...