Piracy

[MarxSchmarx]

Whether you agree with it or not, piracy is against the law in many jurisdictions, including where this board is hosted.

Indeed, board policy already is that:

You agree not to post any copyrighted material unless the copyright is owned by you or by this bulletin board.This applies to links to copyrighted material as well.

We don't want Our Dear Leader to be liable for millions of euros/dollars in copyright infringement or any other legal penalties. Don't give those clowns another excuse to harass us.

So don't:

Link to illegal download sites.
Post workarounds/instructions that are illegal or of dubious legality.

I want to make absolutely clear that violating any of these points will result in a warning point being issued.

I hate to be a hard-ass but we need to be mindful of the forum's well-being.

Also, we won't tolerate advocating illegal downloads. If you disagree with IP law and want to articulate why IP law is bogus, that is fine, but advocating breaking the law is not.

[ZeroNowhere]

Is advocating piracy against the law too?

[MarxSchmarx]

is advocating piracy against the law too?It depends on the jurisdiction.

In most common law jurisdictions, such as the UK, Australia and Canada this usually falls under "Conspiracy".

The situation in the United States is ambiguous, following Brandenberg v. Ohio and Yates v. United States

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brandenburg_v._Ohio
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yates_v._United_States.

In some jurisdictions, especially in east Asia and Latin America, there are few or no specific laws to this effect.

However, in some civil law jurisdictions such as Germany and Turkey, "inciting illegal activity" is specifically against the law and has been interpreted broadly by the courts.

Therefore, I strongly discourage people from advocating illegal downloads. Nothing is gained by it anyway.

[Wanted Man]

What about linking to torrents? A huge part of the legal survival of The Pirate Bay seems to be that they don't actually host any copyrighted content. Or at least, that's what I have gathered. What do you think about this?

[MarxSchmarx]

What about linking to torrents? A huge part of the legal survival of The Pirate Bay seems to be that they don't actually host any copyrighted content. Or at least, that's what I have gathered. What do you think about this?I would discourage it. You raise a valid point, but I think we need to really err on the side of being overly cautious here. In the EU and the anglo-saxon countries, even trivial violations of copyright laws can result in financial sanctions. I do understand where you are coming from, really, but I do have serious doubts that the benefits of posting such links outweigh the potential problems they can involve for this site.

[revolution inaction]

I would discourage it. You raise a valid point, but I think we need to really err on the side of being overly cautious here. In the EU and the anglo-saxon countries, even trivial violations of copyright laws can result in financial sanctions. I do understand where you are coming from, really, but I do have serious doubts that the benefits of posting such links outweigh the potential problems they can involve for this site.

couldn't you just say you will take down anything that violates copyright f the copy right owners ask you to, some other places do that i think.

[MarxSchmarx]

couldn't you just say you will take down anything that violates copyright f the copy right owners ask you to, some other places do that i think.

On some level we could, although not all webpages have done equally well with this.

Indeed, my trepidation with this approach is that it comes down to how the copyright owners "ask us". Some seem to be content sending a private email asking us to take down copywritten material. Others organize a "Cease and Desist" letter signed by a judge. Still others would serve us with massive financial bills and subpoenas to find out who else they can squeeze money out of.

Whatever their form, all of these are things we can, in all honesty, do without.

[amandevsingh]

Can we link to a site that links to a torrent? ;)

[MarxSchmarx]

Can we link to a site that links to a torrent? ;)

I'd advise against it. In some countries, facilitating copyright violations can be as bad as direct violations.

[amandevsingh]

... Pesky Imperialists :(

[Hydro]

Can we link to a site that links to a torrent? ;)
I'd advise against it. In some countries, facilitating copyright violations can be as bad as direct violations.
Uh, so linking to a legal torrent on TPB would also be a bad idea? By that I mean the page for the torrent itself, not the actual file (.torrent) - though I'm guessing this would be the same for a direct .torrent link.

[MarxSchmarx]

Uh, so linking to a legal torrent on TPB would also be a bad idea? By that I mean the page for the torrent itself, not the actual file (.torrent) - though I'm guessing this would be the same for a direct .torrent link.


I was under the impression that TPB itself is under considerable scrutiny in some EU countries. In any event a page containing the link, well, I'm not a lawyer but I'd advise erring on the side of caution. I just don't see how that is materially different from the link itself given that the connection between the two is quitetrivial.

[Manifesto]

I have question about torrents and piracy. My brother says it is not illegal to download that stuff just if you are selling it.

[Verix]

From the forum of pirate bay

. Criminal (http://javascript%3Cb%3E%3C/b%3E:void%280%29;) and civil risks of file sharing – Title 17. 506 (a) states:

(a) Criminal Infringement.—
(1) In general.— Any person who willfully infringes a copyright shall be punished as provided under section 2319 of title 18, if the infringement was committed—
(A) for purposes of commercial advantage or private financial gain;
(B) by the reproduction or distribution, including by electronic means, during any 180–day period, of 1 or more copies or phonorecords of 1 or more copyrighted works, which have a total retail value of more than $1,000; or
(C) by the distribution of a work being prepared for commercial distribution, by making it available on a computer network accessible to members of the public, if such person knew or should have known that the work was intended for commercial distribution.
Note* that (C) is later defined further to include
Quote:
(A) a computer program, a musical work, a motion picture or other audiovisual work, or a sound recording, if, at the time of unauthorized distribution—
(i) the copyright owner has a reasonable expectation of commercial distribution; and
(ii) the copies or phonorecords of the work have not been commercially distributed; or

(B) a motion picture, if, at the time of unauthorized distribution, the motion picture—
(i) has been made available for viewing in a motion picture exhibition facility; and
(ii) has not been made available in copies for sale to the general public in the United States in a format intended to permit viewing outside a motion picture exhibition facility.
So to summarize, if you do not distribute for profit, do not reproduce(share) more than $1000 worth of copyrighted materials within a six month period, or share anything that is not yet available (but soon will be) for retail sale, you are not a criminal! Otherwise you could potentially be charged and sentenced with up to 5 years in prison and some fines (not more than $2500 I think it was).

Under the DMCA provisions, a person who rips a DVD/CD that has any sort of a protection against copying (like DRM) can be convicted and sentenced to up to 5 years prison and $500,000 in fines. The same severe punishment goes for anyone who changes or removes the following from © material; title, name of author, name of performers, terms and conditions, numbers or symbols referring to such information. After reading these amendments I assume that anyone who has received a DMCA violation (http://javascript%3Cb%3E%3C/b%3E:void%280%29;) notice did so after a torrent (http://javascript%3Cb%3E%3C/b%3E:void%280%29;) of © material was uploaded from and primarily seeded on the IP# that they use. This would cause a © owner to presume that the person who made the said torrent circumvented © protection that was originally included with the material. A presumption is hardly enough to take legal (http://javascript%3Cb%3E%3C/b%3E:void%280%29;) action. The evidence needed to show that a suspect has circumvented © protection would require not only the presence of the circumvented material (say on a HD), but it would also need to include evidence that the suspect is responsible for the circumvention.

In addition to criminal charges, or perhaps alternatively, © can take civil action against infringers for $2500-$25,000 in damages per violation (evidence of circumvention).

What is a DMCA notice and what should I do if I receive one? - A DMCA notice is pretty much a generic form with certain info filled out that points to an individual user who is believed to be infringing on copyright laws. It sent either directly from the copyright holder or their legal representative. It is not to be confused with a regular © infringement notice as it specifically pertains to a violation of the DMCA amendments to © laws. It is simply a warning that says "Hey you. We're watching you! Don't do that please!" but it rarely leads to further legal action. It looks something like this:
Quote:
[return address]

Demand Under the Digital Millenium Copyright Act

Dear [Sir | Madam]:

On [date], I noticed that your [site | email newsletter | electronic message | electronic product] [exact name and URL, ISBN, or ISSN, if available], dated [apparent date of infringement], includes an [attributed | unattributed] copy that infringes on my exclusive right in the [story | article | review] [writer's title]. According to my records, I have not authorized this use.
Pursuant to the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, this letter serves as actual notice of infringement in the event of legal proceedings. The information in this notification is accurate, and under penalty of perjury, I state that I am the owner of an exclusive right infringed by the specified material. Pursuant to 17 U.S.C. §§ 512(c)(1)(C) and 512(g), a telephone or other oral response is not satisfactory.

Sincerely,

Darth Vader
It may be sent to the user directly or a slight variation is sent to your ISP (http://javascript%3Cb%3E%3C/b%3E:void%280%29;) who then acts as a middle man in forwarding the notice to it's user.

The action that is most commonly recommended to those who receive such a notice is what is known as the "ostrich defense." This means that one does NOT reply to the notice and simply acts as if they never even received it. This will be important should they ever be brought up on charges as it will benefit them to seek legal advice before ever making contact with issuer of the notice. If you get such a letter via snail mail (http://javascript%3Cb%3E%3C/b%3E:void%280%29;), you can treat it the same way as it is not a notice of legal action. It is up to you if you want to seek legal advice at this point.

Once a notice is sent, the copyright holder or his legal people can request that a subpoena from the court be issued to an ISP to gain the identity of an alleged infringer. They will not do this without weighing the risk vs. reward of pursuing further legal action. Should you receive a notice threating legal action if you don't pay them a settlement or notice that legal action has been filed against you, immediately seek the legal advice of someone who is willing to fight in your defense. Don't settle for anyone who will give in to these APOs' threats or wants you to plead guilty.

Evidence usually required to hold alleged infringers liable - First of all, the presence of copyrighted material on any machine or network is not in itself admissible as evidence in a court of law. The reason behind this is that any person can manipulate a given machine and the machine itself does not identify the person using it. This is why legal action is not taken against the average bit torrent (http://javascript%3Cb%3E%3C/b%3E:void%280%29;) user. It is very difficult to prove. So far, the strongest evidence that has been able to stick a P2P user with liability is if they have repeatedly used the same username and/or password while sharing files. See below for details on username : password.

Risk vs. reward for © holders taking legal action against alleged © infringers – These are some of the questions © holders are likely to ask before they sue a person: How much evidence do they have against the person or group who is allegedly infringing? How much will this legal battle cost them? How much money will they be awarded if they win? If they win this case will it possibly send a message to other © infringers that will deter them from using P2P to share their materials? What would Jesus do?

A person who is simply sharing a few files on their own using bit torrent does not often make the risk:reward ratio that is ideal for these big companies to take legal action against them. Of course there are exceptions to this as well, as you will see below.

Summary of risks of file-sharing – Yes, there are some harsh penalties in place. But because of the difficulty in identifying a P2P user as an infringer, the poor risk:reward ratio of taking legal action against the average suspected infringer, and the 'lotto defense' aka shear number of P2P users in the world (thanx S8), it is highly unlikely that the average P2P user will ever be prosecuted or even sued for sharing © content. This holds especially true for bit torrent users as it is much more difficult to built evidence against suspected infringers. That being said, the risk does exist and now that you are aware of it you can make an informed decision on whether or not you will continue to share files. I also recommend understand the commonly used methods of minimizing your risk and which ones are most and least reliable.

Commonly used/recommended methods of risk management and how effective they are:

Public Trackers – Some people believe that public trackers are the most dangerous because they are being watched the most by anti piracy organizations (APOs). While the thought of this may be nerve racking to some, the average bit torrent user has little to nothing they need to worry about. The reason is simply that because public trackers do not require users to provide a username : password to download a torrent, there is nothing more than an IP# to be gained should there server(s) be confiscated by 'the man.'

Some trackers such as the one used by TPB do not log user info in the first place. This information is kept in volatile RAM which means if the server is pulled or if there is a power outage, all of this info will be forever lost. That means there would be zero evidence for any prosecutor to work with.

For anyone concerned about fake torrents on public servers, there is really nothing to worry about as it is not a crime to download them. If you are concerned about a virus being attached to a file, use an up to date virus scanner and for the love of Captain Hook, read the comments before downloading the torrent. More aware users will usually post something to let others know about a file that is fake or contains a virus. I recommend users continue to use public trackers.

Private Trackers – While this is often touted as a much safer source for torrents, I humbly beg to differ. It is true that users won't find fake/infected files on a private tracker. Users are also less likely to be watched by APOs, but there is one thing inherent to all private trackers that puts users at a higher risk of being identified as an infringer; the username : password required to download/upload (http://javascript%3Cb%3E%3C/b%3E:void%280%29;) a torrent file. See 'username : password' below for more info. There is at least one elite private tracker that I know of that also uses the volatile RAM method mentioned above, but most rely on logging such information.

That being said, APOs are not likely to access these logs unless the server is confiscated, and it is still difficult to identify users. To date, there has not been one case of prosecution against the users of a private tracker that has been shut down. I recommend continued use of private trackers.

Username : Password – Any client used for file-sharing that requires a username is much riskier than the average bit torrent client (http://javascript%3Cb%3E%3C/b%3E:void%280%29;). There are applications that can gather user info, whois there IP#, and send an infringement notification to their ISP automatically. This is mainly used to seek out people who upload © content. Should the user somehow end up in court, it is
the username being logged in at the time that the IP# was seen downloading the © material that is the biggest piece of evidence used in identifying an alleged infringer. The next step is proving this to be the infringer's username. The common way of doing that is to show that the username and/or password has been used by the person in other instances as well (forums, member sites, e-mail, etc.). If a user were to create a unique username : password for every account created, they would still look to see if they were created by the same e-mail address or one registered to the accused. This would be much more difficult to ID the user as the infringer. The best level of protection would be to create unique username : password accounts using an anonymous e-mail of some sort. I imagine it can also be argued that someone else (remote user) could create an e-mail from the IP# of the accused. I recommend bit torrent for file-sharing and for the average user this isn't something to worry about unless you're using a private tracker and you are a privacy freak. If you are an uploader you may want to use unique username : passwords for each account. Still it is unlikely you will end up in court unless you are a major supplier of © material.

Proxy – While it is possible to configure your bit torrent client to use a proxy, the slow speeds make it highly impractical for this type of file-sharing. Proxies do make it very difficult for someone tracking you to see what files you are accessing. If you don't mind

Bit Torrent Encryption – This is a commonly misunderstood feature of bit torrent clients. It has nothing to do with privacy really, as anyone can still see what torrent an IP# is accessing and then send out an infringement notice to their ISP. The actual reason for adding this feature is that it hides the protocol header which means that tools designed to spot and throttle IP#'s using a bit torrent client will not see that the client is being used and therefore can not throttle the IP# with fake packets. Refer to your client's manual to learn how you can configure encryption to accept both encrypted and non-encrypted connections. As far as I understand, this shouldn't mess with the actual file transfer speed, it just takes a little longer to initiate connection between peers. No biggie. The more people who use this configuration, the better as it will default to encrypted connections but still allow others to connect. If you're being throttled you will need to go all encrypted.

IP Blocking – This is perhaps the most commonly recommended technique to maintain privacy while file-sharing. A list or range of IP#'s a user wants to block from connecting to them (and seeing their torrent activity) can be added manually to the firewall or bit torrent client or this can be done using software that is designed to import and block a pre-designed list of IP#'s known to be used by APOs and government agencies. While it may make sense to block these people, there is no way of knowing what IP# an APO is going to be using to track torrents. It is also possible for these groups to change their IP# to get around IP blocking. Unless you block all IP#'s in your bit torrent client by default and only allow connections specifically from those you know and trust, this may or may not reduce your chances of being tracked. It certainly doesn't make you invisible. Range blocking may also limit connections to other P2P users. This one is pretty much left up to personal preference.

Uploading torrents – People who upload torrents of © material are bigger targets for APOs. Because of the DMCA provisions, these people face greater consequences should they be charged with a violation of said provisions. If you wish to avoid a DMCA notice then you would probably have to do something along the lines of uploading the file to the tracker using a good proxy setup and then send the torrent and file direct to a friend in a safer country to be the initial seeder. I don't know of any other way around being tracked as the uploader. Again, this depends on how paranoid you want to be.

[Verix]

OMG!!! i just found out The pirate bay sold out its going to become a pay-site!
http://www.globalgamingfactory.com/, i guess the corp. media won in the end :crying:

[politics student]

OMG!!! i just found out The pirate bay sold out its going to become a pay-site!
http://www.globalgamingfactory.com/, i guess the corp. media won in the end :crying:

Have no fear. They finally fell to the pressure but its only one site, there are many more. Another will soon become as big as Pirate Bay and the capitalists will attempt to target them next.

[NecroCommie]

I was never addicted to pirate bay anyway. I get my copyrighted material elswhere. Yes! That is right you pansy cops who monitor this site! I dont encourage anyone to violate law, but I am loud about my own activities yes! Come and get me if you dare.

[leochaos]

Hi,
well I guess we should follow the suggestion of whoever is running this site.We do not want the poor guy to get involved with authorities.
i even agree on the suggestion to err on the safe side.
After all this forum is about discussion on political ideas etc
In one way we had a similar problem when we organized demonstrations;in many countries somebody had to sign for the permit and in theory he was responsible if something wrong(meaning right) happened.
Given this,I am not so sure about the fact that we should not discuss about piracy.Again,I would follow whatever the guy running this discussion feels right,but-maybe I misunderstood- I had the feeling that we should not even debate piracy.I mean what it means etc
If this is the case then goodbye, I guess that a lot of post advocating violence of the oppressed may be against some laws, somewhere.If so we should close this thing down and put a big CENSORSHIP sign everywhere.
My suggestion is that we could discuss about the implication of this whole copyright thing,even Newsweek does it.To me,it is a relative interesting topic,concerning the fact that millions of individuals are breaking the law.Not exactly a revolutionary activity but ...
I am more interested in what is behind things like Piracy bay.I have read that the two swedish guy have sold it for 6.8 million US and that actually they have not been running it for a long time.What kind of scam is behind this? Does anybody know?Somebody says ads,but I did not say that many on Pbay.Are they selling informations they get from people visiting their site?are they putting spyware in the receiving computer.Is it basically another money making operation under the disguise of free use of the web?.Does anybody know.
If I am breaking some safety rules I have no problem with you deleting this.
But I believe your real problem is that somebody will not think about your situation,I do.On the other side you should not be paranoic(just careful).
On a different point I always remember that not very clever video of the ecosomething Coronado.He got in real trouble when it was posted.Not sure how the whole thing ended.
The important lesson here ,I think, is to never forget that it is hightly possible that all 'revolutionary' websites may be under some sort of scrutiny by the authorities.We should not be afraid of putting up our ideas;but we also should consider that the enemy may be listening...so it is plainly stupid to forget it.I am too old to be very active,but I do worry that the web is probably used to get lists of dissidents.Some jockers are able to do it with a couple of fast machines, just imagine what kind of informations government agencies are piling up.
By the way,do you know that the USA at its very beginning as a new nation(hard to believe that it was a developing country) did not sign the convention about the protection of intellectual property.At the time it was not copyright, but something else, probably based in England.It says something about the whole thing.
ciao

[MarxSchmarx]

Given this,I am not so sure about the fact that we should not discuss about piracy.Again,I would follow whatever the guy running this discussion feels right,but-maybe I misunderstood- I had the feeling that we should not even debate piracy.I mean what it means etc
...
My suggestion is that we could discuss about the implication of this whole copyright thing,even Newsweek does it.To me,it is a relative interesting topic,concerning the fact that millions of individuals are breaking the law.Not exactly a revolutionary activity but ...



I don't have a problem with discussing it at all, nor do I think anybody else here does.



But I believe your real problem is that somebody will not think about your situation,I do.On the other side you should not be paranoic(just careful).
On a different point I always remember that not very clever video of the ecosomething Coronado.He got in real trouble when it was posted.Not sure how the whole thing ended.
The important lesson here ,I think, is to never forget that it is hightly possible that all 'revolutionary' websites may be under some sort of scrutiny by the authorities


Correction. it is certain that some desk security bureaucrat in at least one country (hi!) reads this site.

Copyright violations generally become a problem in civil litigation. Most of the time you can expect a cease and desist order, but because the site is international it's impossible for us to keep up with local conditions everywhere. In theory, we could get hit with huge fines and suits (or demands to hand over the information of users who are engaged in copyright violation). Even trivial infractions, though, have been charged massive bills and, well, we can live without having to look over our backs on this.



.We should not be afraid of putting up our ideas;but we also should consider that the enemy may be listening...so it is plainly stupid to forget it.I am too old to be very active,but I do worry that the web is probably used to get lists of dissidents.Some jockers are able to do it with a couple of fast machines, just imagine what kind of informations government agencies are piling up.
By the way,do you know that the USA at its very beginning as a new nation(hard to believe that it was a developing country) did not sign the convention about the protection of intellectual property.At the time it was not copyright, but something else, probably based in England.It says something about the whole thing.


Yes I did - in fact none of the major (currently) industrialized countries did during their own industrialization. If you want to read about the development of IP laws I would recommend "Bad Samaritans" by Ha Joon Chang http://www.amazon.com/Bad-Samaritans-Secret-History-Capitalism/dp/1596915986/ref=pd_sim_b_24

[Number 16 Bus Shelter]

To be honest, this thread does come across as somewhat pathetic.
I mean, on a site that is basically dedicated to overthrowing not only current governments, but advocating a massive change is society, we have a thread begging people to "err on the side of caution"

I can only laugh to be honest:laugh:

[MarxSchmarx]

To be honest, this thread does come across as somewhat pathetic.
I mean, on a site that is basically dedicated to overthrowing not only current governments, but advocating a massive change is society, we have a thread begging people to "err on the side of caution"

I can only laugh to be honest:laugh:

So what would you suggest?

[Number 16 Bus Shelter]

So what would you suggest?

Is the site in fact based in the USA?

[Number 16 Bus Shelter]

Is there a possibility of hosting the site on a server in a country with lax piracy laws?
That's probably too much hassle, and, like in the case with Pirate bay, when they used to be based in Sweden, the USA government (pressured by corporations) pressured the Swedish government into taking action against the pirate bay. Now they are based in Ukraine.

Perhaps you could also place a disclaimer on the site?

[Die Rote Fahne]

"You wouldn't download a car"

[MarxSchmarx]

Is there a possibility of hosting the site on a server in a country with lax piracy laws?
That's probably too much hassle, and, like in the case with Pirate bay, when they used to be based in Sweden, the USA government (pressured by corporations) pressured the Swedish government into taking action against the pirate bay. Now they are based in Ukraine.


This is not enough of an issue to justify the site's owner to move the server to a jurisdiction that allows this.



Perhaps you could also place a disclaimer on the site?

What would we have it say? Right now we already state, under forum rules:
http://www.revleft.com/vb/faq.php?faq=general#faq_faqforumrules


You agree not to post any copyrighted material unless the copyright is owned by you or by this bulletin board.and to some extent that is what this thread is supposed to serve as. If you think this rule needs changing, the members forum is there for you to make your case.


"You wouldn't download a car"

To be sure, people here have differing opinions about the existing state of affairs,

[Stranger Than Paradise]

To be honest, this thread does come across as somewhat pathetic.
I mean, on a site that is basically dedicated to overthrowing not only current governments, but advocating a massive change is society, we have a thread begging people to "err on the side of caution"

I can only laugh to be honest:laugh:

Don't be stupid, how is going to prison for piracy helping our cause.

[ls]

Don't be stupid, how is going to prison for piracy helping our cause.

You probably won't go to prison if you get caught (which alone is about a 1 in 1000 chance, although it's increasing slowly). Nowdays, you will probably get your internet cut off (in the UK at least) after those warnings they give you though, I think you get three of them before they do it, dunno if that law has actually come into effect yet though.

[Ocean Seal]

"You wouldn't download a car"
I would if I could.

[Fire]

Is there a possibility of hosting the site on a server in a country with lax piracy laws?
That's probably too much hassle, and, like in the case with Pirate bay, when they used to be based in Sweden, the USA government (pressured by corporations) pressured the Swedish government into taking action against the pirate bay. Now they are based in Ukraine.

Perhaps you could also place a disclaimer on the site?

I can understand this policy. I hate intellectual property as much as the next comrade but the idea is, don't shit where you eat. You can be a pirate, but do it elsewhere. RevLeft gets enough heat for being leftist. If we're going to get taken down, let it be for something revolutionary, not because someone wanted to download The Hobbit movie without paying.

[ComradeLeninist]

I'll just say I borrowed it and shared it for a bit and eventually "Give it back", if that doesn't work for the capitalists... well peerblock, anyone?

[Thirsty Crow]

Also, we won't tolerate advocating illegal downloads. If you disagree with IP law and want to articulate why IP law is bogus, that is fine, but advocating breaking the law is not.This bit is pure crap. We might as well stop advocating, well, pretty much that makes the revolutionary left - revolutionary.

EDIT: fuck talk about necroing a thread.