MPAA gets caught laying torrent traps
Fool us once, shame on us. Fool us twice? Not gonna happen.
The torrent files are set up as 'honey pots' - they record the IP of the connecting pirate as he or she downloads the pieces of the files (which are bogus, by the way). They're even named smartly - many of the fakes look like real torrent names, including fake cracking groups, formats, etc. And before anyone goes and screams "Entrapment!", the MPAA is hiding behind the fact that it is not a law enforcement agency (despite that it takes the reverse of that stance in the courtroom) and that it's just offering something fakes for people who were going to do anyway, making the act legal.
Under law, it is illegal to "fight fire with fire," so the trackers that propegate the servers are actually links to dead files that will either stall close to completion or just be a mess of scrambled data. To date, nobody has had virus or malware issues with the dodgy sites - just a lot of failed downloads. The amount of servers and quality of the files being thrown out illustrates a very professional job.
The btjunkie admin recognized a pattern in the servers that provide continually deficient downloads, and the guys over at TorrentFreak have started to put up some of the server names. A combined force from both sites is combing through and flagging the files based on their host, as well. All of the hosts come out of the southern California and Las Vegas areas, and are easy to identify by IP ranges.
Just for an example of how much of this is going on, here is a current search from TorrentPortal - all of the files with a red X are fakes.
Got a thought on the **AA's dubious antics? Vent off your annoyances in our forums.
Previous Article
32 Comments
Discuss in the forums ReplyDoes something like Peer Guardian stop them from getting your IP address or are you stuffed as soon as you start downloading these fakes?
<A88>
PeerGuardian doesn't protect you, all it does is give you a false sense of security
732 million IP addresses blocked. I think it provides a measure of protection.
On a side not, im pretty sure hobbes in Da Dego's avatar was what the **AA looked like when they did this :D
I thought they had been doing this since the kazaa days etc.
Even if they arn't trying to catch people they are frustrating them into not getting what they are after, without a lot of hassel and therefore just going legit.
Mhmm.
Buy a DVD. Up a torrent. And 10,000 people can easily snatch it. Some of which can re-up it at a later date to even more people.
That's exactly like letting your 2 or 3 best buds "borrow" it (which, of course, means they'll watch it and it'll disappear in to a mysterious black hole), right? ;)
Not much sympathy for either side from me, like someone else said earlier. :\
Not that I'm entirely innocent either, though I've got a ton better over the last couple years. All I do now is download a few TV shows, many of which like Rome I already paid for in the form of my subscription (hbo -- premium channel, no commercials, same with even HD BSG reruns on HD channels).
I've actually got more legal copies of XP than I have functional computers. :(
If they are uploading a torrent that is the actual program but they don't let you download it all (blocked at 90%) then they are performing an illegal act so they surely can't file lawsuits for downloading something that they are uploading? The old fighting fire with fire doesn't work.
And if they send you a jumbled up piece of rubbish that isn't what the file claims to be then your are downloading jumbled up rubbish and therefore you aren't breaking any laws. So - I don't see the point in that either.
So essentially, what is the point?
If these shows were on UK TV then I would watch them with adverts no problem.
I expect its just as much an effort to disrupt torrenting as it is to actually catch people in a way that allows them to prosecute. If people started to have bad torrents that didn't work all the time, then it'd make the whole thing extremely frustrating - the MPAA probably figure the more time and energy consuming it is to download something illegally using bit-torrent (and putting up 'bad' torrents would make it so), the more likely people are to just give up and use other (legal) methods to obtain their films or music.
I personaly buy lots of DVDs. I probably spend about £60-100 a month (gotta love being 19 with no real expenditure) on DVDs but I'm still a downloader. I still get warnings from my ISP for using to much bandwith (damn Orange not knowing what "unlimited" means). And I will continue to download untill they make available all the content on Pritate Bay or Demonoid. Example...
Even tho that 70's show is currently on season 8 you can currently only buy up to season 4 (that has only become available since christmas).
Murder Most Horrid, a great comedy with Dawn French that has been completely withough sale on DVD or VHS.
Music bootlegs, most of these were available if you were at in the right place at the right time. They have always had questionable legal status and even tho some are on ebay but most you'll never get actual copies of.
If I see a film/TV show/album that I've downloaded I like, I buy it. Most new films are god awful and get deleted after the 1st watching. If DVDs for everything I wanted were sold I would buy them. Also a fair price for a new film ocasionaly would be nice. I'm sure reducing the price of a new DVD by £5 would give them more sales than prosicuting dead people ever will.
Case, point.
I understand that torrenting and paedophillia aren't the same - but if the tactics are valid in court for one act.......
Yeah, that was one thing i was wandering about. Whether or not a lawsuit can be formed with the obvious intention of downloading illegal material.
Doubt it would work since the MPAA isn't a legal authority. You can't sue someone for stealing your car if they steal a cardboard cutout of your car, thinking it was really your car. They shouldn't be able to sue you for stealing movies when you end up stealing nothing at all. Plus, downloading is legal, uploading isn't. This is most likely just to annoy people enough to stop using BT as much.
I think this is where it gets a bit tricky. When you hear about pirating music, it's just people getting sued. When you hear about pedophiles, they go to jail.
Difference is one is civil and the other is criminal.
I'm not sure if this is correct because im not a lawyer but i believe downloading content is not a criminal act. It is only when you profit off of the content that it is considered a crime.
My wife and I are currently being sued by a local business for speaking out about their practices and holding a legal and peaceful demonstration. Entirely within our constitutional rights (in the US) but they still filed a bogus suit. However in this case it will probably back fire on them. Once they filed the press are now much more interested in the situation. As long as (US) laws allow for SLAPPs (http://www.slapps.org/) and other bogus lawsuits to continue corporations with deep pockets will take advantage of this.