| Companies using piracy techniques against Filesharers |
| Written by Admin | |
| Tuesday, 27 February 2007 | |
|
The Corporate Enemies of Filesharers
If they
aren't shutting down your favourite torrent site and sending you
infringement notices they're filling your network with fakes, sueing
you and invading your privacy. So who are the enemies of P2P and what
are they doing to ruin your file-sharing experience? If you share
files, it's time to meet your nemesis.
The
idea here is to give an overview of anti-p2p activity. This is by no
means an exhaustive report but the aim is to give a summary of some of
the companies developing a new industry - one dedicated to disrupting
the activities of file-sharers.
Founded in 2001, Antipiratbyrån
(APB) is a Swedish non-governmental anti-piracy group, its members
consisting of representatives from dozens of Swedish media companies.
APB rose to infamy in March 2005 when the police conducted an
anti-piracy raid against Swedish ISP Bahnhof,
only to be presented with evidence that APB themselves had hired
someone to plant copyright material. APB are well known (and most
hated) for their activities in working to put ThePirateBay BitTorrent
tracker offline.
Audible Magic
tout themselves as a leading provider of content protection and
management solutions. Of interest to file-sharers is their 'Copysense'
identification technology, which identifies media by matching an
electronic 'fingerprint' unique of the particular content, to that of a
'fingerprint' stored in their claimed 5 million-strong registered
database. It is being widely reported that Google will be employing
Audible Magic's technology to screen videos submitted to YouTube.
Silicon Valley based BayTSP
trumpets its ability to identify and track infringing content on the
internet and take it down. They do a lot of tracking of content
distributed via the BitTorrent protocol and regularly send out
copyright infringement notices (link PDF)
to users via their ISP, ordering the content to be taken down. BayTSP
also claim to be able to track first uploaders of copyright works on
the BitTorrent and eDonkey networks via their 'First Source'
technology. It is unclear how this system operates but it is believed
to be relatively primitive - BayTSP searches for filenames (in torrents
or ed2k links) which imply infringing content and then download the
content to confirm that is indeed the case. The user's ISP would then
be contacted with a takedown demand in the usual way . The quality of
the methods used by BayTSP appear suspect in certain situations.
The Dutch anti-piracy outfit BREIN has claimed the scalps of many small torrent sites in the Netherlands. They can be quite aggressive
in their war on Piracy. One of the most used tactics is to track down
the owner of the site, and send a letter stating that they face several
years in prison if they don't stop serving torrents, and expose the
users. Up until now, BREIN has not yet taken action to the bigger
torrent sites in The Netherlands. Last January, BREIN won a lawsuit, and the Dutch ISP 'KPN' was forced to hand over the name and address of the dutchtorrent.org admin.
The British Phonographic Industry or BPI
claims to have pursued hundreds, if not thousands of UK file-sharers
accused of uploading copyright material. Previously, BPI General
Counsel Geoff Taylor said that the BPI had no desire to drag people
through the courts. The number of people who have actually settled with
the BPI (i.e paid a 'fine') is unclear. What is clear is that not
everyone who receives a complaint from the BPI actually settles and so
far, no-one has ever appeared in a UK court to answer such a complaint.
It appears that threats from the BPI to P2P’ers have a somewhat empty
quality about them.
The International Federation of the Phonographic Industry or IFPI
throws its net wide, targeting users of many networks including
BitTorrent, eDonkey, DirectConnect, Gnutella, Limewire and SoulSeek.
After carrying out what was claimed to be the largest ever worldwide
legal action against filesharers in 2005 - effectively doubling the
number of people being sued to over 4,000 - 2006 saw its biggest
assault yet, with the IFPI targetting a further 8000 with enforcement
actions.
Macrovision,
as far as p2p is concerned, is a company trying to keep DVDRips off
file-sharing networks. It claims that its anti-piracy solution called
Ripguard can recover 97% of all revenue lost due to DVD ripping piracy.
In reality Ripguard is easily defeated.
While
Macrovision is failing to keep DVDRips off P2P networks, the Dolby
subsidiary Cinea is using watermarks to track the source of DVD Screeners uploaded to the internet. The CineFence system from Philips does something similar, except it tracks the source of a camcorded movie back to the theater it was filmed in.
If filling file-sharing networks with unwanted junk is your thing then Media Defender Inc
takes some beating. Purchased by ArtistDirect in 2005, they are
currently working with labels such as Suretone Records to spam
file-sharing networks with partial videos and music in an attempt to
generate traffic to their website. Additionally, they were embarrassed
recently when their involvement in operating fake MPAA torrents was revealed.
MediaSentry
is a company offering similar services to BayTSP. Where BayTSP is used
a lot by the likes of the MPAA, MediaSentry is popular with the RIAA.
Monitoring file-sharing networks for infringements of their clients
media, they identify and trace IP addresses they claim are engaged in
such activity. MediaSentry's effectiveness has been called into
question, notably in Foundation v. UPC Nederland link.
The MPAA is a well known anti-piracy lobbying organization, that protects the rights of its members, the 'big six' movie studios. February 2006, the MPAA announced lawsuits (PDF)
against Torrentspy, Torrentbox and Isohunt, three of the most popular
BitTorrent search engines. The MPAA was also involved in the raid on
The Pirate Bay this May. They even sent a letter (PDF) to Sweden's
State Secretary this March in which they kindly requested that The
Pirate Bay be taken down. In 2005 the MPAA successfully shut down
Lokitorrent, Btefnet, and Elitetorrents. But the MPAA does not have a
clean slate either. They violated the linkware license of the 'Forest Blog' blogging engine.
File-sharers
tend to have long memories and even if an anti-piracy company decides
to change strategy, it can be difficult to shake off a tarnished image.
French anti-piracy group Retspan and its subsidiary PeerFactor became known in 2004 after reports it was giving file-sharers financial incentives to spread fake files, a claim it later denied. Even though Peerfactor tried to 'go straight' in 2006 with a uTorrent
deal, it's the original connection with Retspan which prevails in the
mind of many sharers. For in 2004 it was Retspan who dared to take on
the now-legendary Suprnova, trying to get it shut down by reporting it
to the FBI and by sending threats to sites hosting Suprnova mirrors.
The RIAA
protects the rights of a large group of record labels and distributors.
The RIAA seems to use law suits merely as threats, a way to 'bully'
people (dead or alive) into paying their exorbitant fines.
Most of their victims do not have the money to fight back. They often
offer people a chance to settle for $3000 or $4000, leaving them broke,
but avoiding a real case. This trick seems to work well for the RIAA,
they easily collect money without having to prove (they have no clue)
that the defendant is actually someone who engaged in peer to peer file
sharing of copyrighted music without authorization.
Finnish Venture Cup winner ViralG
burst onto the scene in 2005 with a claim that it could end 99% of all
file-sharing. It uses technology that enables it to exploit poor
hashing technology employed by the likes of the moribund Kazaa but
appears unable to do a thing about files found on other networks,
including the mighty BitTorrent.
ViralG -
like many anti-p2p companies - seem to make wild claims about the
effectiveness of their systems. Ask anyone who visits a search engine
such as mininova and they will tell you: to a greater or lesser extent, the anti-p2p companies have failed. Miserably. And finally, I wanted to end this article on a lighter note and happily I can do so with the inclusion of the one, the only - Web Sheriff!!, the company that shot to fame via the publication of its copyright complaints made to ThePirateBay, or more accurately, the comedy value of the responses. Well worth a read. White Stripes/Web Sheriff.
|