U.S. Government Begins Shutting Down P2P Networks with multistate Raids

[dmcowen674]

8-25-2004 Government breaks up file-sharing networks

Law enforcement agents have raided five homes and one ISP in what the Department of Justice calls the first federal enforcement action against piracy on peer-to-peer networks.

Agents seized computers, software, and computer equipment in the searches, which took place Wednesday in Texas, New York, and Wisconsin

Attorney General John Ashcroft says in the DOJ's statement. "The Department of Justice is committed to enforcing intellectual property laws, and we will pursue those who steal copyrighted materials, even when they try to hide behind the false anonymity of peer-to-peer networks."

Law enforcement officials say this is the first time the department is taking criminal enforcement action involving P-to-P networks and piracy.

The crackdown on file-sharing is part of an ongoing investigation dubbed Operation Digital Gridlock

 

[charrison]

The action did not target well-known public file-swapping services such as Kazaa or Gnutella (news - web sites), but went after lower-profile, private sharing networks that use NeoModus's Direct Connect technology. The networks established by The Underground Network require users to share a minimum of 100GB of files with other users on the network, according to the DOJ.

 

[BaliBabyDoc]

We all know Arsecroft is arguably one of GWB's greatest blights on American society but I have little compassion for these guys. There's no justification for taking what doesn't belong to you . . . copyrighted material. But these guys were sharing a minimum of 100GB on an elite/limited access network. They might as well have put a big sign in the yard "Hey we are stealing like mad in here!"

 

[Anubis08]

I'd have to agree. It is easy to say look> it's free, but it is stealing and I would raise hel! to if someone was blatantly stealing from me.

 

[Bowfinger]

Originally posted by: BaliBabyDoc
We all know Arsecroft is arguably one of GWB's greatest blights on American society but I have little compassion for these guys. There's no justification for taking what doesn't belong to you . . . copyrighted material. But these guys were sharing a minimum of 100GB on an elite/limited access network. They might as well have put a big sign in the yard "Hey we are stealing like mad in here!"

I agree. One has to question, however, why the federal government is acting as rent-a-cops for the entertainment industry. Copyright infringements are -- or at least were -- civil violations that should be addressed in civil court. The studios are perfectly capable of hiring attorneys and pursuing these alleged violations themselves. Why am I footing their legal bills?

 

[BaliBabyDoc]

Originally posted by: Bowfinger

Originally posted by: BaliBabyDoc
We all know Arsecroft is arguably one of GWB's greatest blights on American society but I have little compassion for these guys. There's no justification for taking what doesn't belong to you . . . copyrighted material. But these guys were sharing a minimum of 100GB on an elite/limited access network. They might as well have put a big sign in the yard "Hey we are stealing like mad in here!"

I agree. One has to question, however, why the federal government is acting as rent-a-cops for the entertainment industry. Copyright infringements are -- or at least were -- civil violations that should be addressed in civil court. The studios are perfectly capable of hiring attorneys and pursuing these alleged violations themselves. Why am I footing their legal bills?

DOJ has largely given up on protecting us from real crime. Gang violence, child abuse, and fraud are all on the rise. Yet DOJ wastes millions on cannabis clubs, legal porn, and file sharing.

I think the entertainment industry will do itself in. Pretty soon their products will be so bad that people won't even bother to steal it.

 

[NightCrawler]

I wonder how they got into the private network, they must have weaseled their way in.

 

[zephyrprime]

But these guys were sharing a minimum of 100GB on an elite/limited access network

A 100GB isn't a lot these days. A lot of DC++ sites have 100GB as the minimum requirement for entry! And they're hardly limited access.

 

[ntdz]

im sick of ashcroft going after warez people, there are more important people to get than teens downloading music and games they wouldnt buy anyway

 

[cpumaster]

They won't let ashcroft join or download from them that's why the crack down. That's the real story.

 

[imported_KirbsAw]

I feel so much safer now. I'm sure the terrorists will leave us alone if we stop file sharing!

 

[Deleted member 4644]

I ABSOLUTELY HATE JOHN ASHCROFT.

My belief is that these people who were file sharing new the risks. They knew that there was a possibility -- however slight -- that they would be caught.

That fact, however, does not make me like John Ashcroft.

Men like him are a true blight upon this nation.

Edit: Ashcroft covered Justice with a blue tarp. Need I say more?

 

[Kibbo]

I personally favour a "loosening" of current intellectual property laws.

But that doesn't mean one should throw them out the window.

Basically these busts were against those who were pretty intense sharers. I don't even have 100 GB on my whole comp. Any loosening will have to include enforcement at whichever limit we choose to keep.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: LordSegan
I ABSOLUTELY HATE JOHN ASHCROFT.

My belief is that these people who were file sharing knew the risks. They knew that there was a possibility -- however slight -- that they would be caught.

That fact, however, does not make me like John Ashcroft.

Men like him are a true blight upon this nation.

Edit: Ashcroft covered Justice with a blue tarp. Need I say more?

I think the Yardstick, if you will, has to be were these people replicating DVD's CD's etc and selling them like the massive Factories in China and everywhere else???

Insane, that A$$croft has nothing better to do than play Rent a Cop for the Hollywood Rich Thugs. Oh that's right, they own A$$croft and our Government, what was I thinking :roll:

 

[shiner]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: LordSegan
I ABSOLUTELY HATE JOHN ASHCROFT.

My belief is that these people who were file sharing knew the risks. They knew that there was a possibility -- however slight -- that they would be caught.

That fact, however, does not make me like John Ashcroft.

Men like him are a true blight upon this nation.

Edit: Ashcroft covered Justice with a blue tarp. Need I say more?

I think the Yardstick, if you will, has to be were these people replicating DVD's CD's etc and selling them like the massive Factories in China and everywhere else???

Insane, that A$$croft has nothing better to do than play Rent a Cop for the Hollywood Rich Thugs. Oh that's right, they own A$$croft and our Government, what was I thinking :roll:

You afraid they might come after you again or something? Touchy....touchy.......

 

[Gravity]

I was just thinking of downloading dc++ too.

What's the use now?

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: Gravity
I was just thinking of downloading dc++ too.

What's the use now?

Having a computer and P2P is becoming like Guns, only Criminals will have them.

 

[Gravity]

Perhaps there's a different side to the story?

here

Sooner or later it'll become obvious that Gridlock would have been better named CWOTMAM (Complete Waste Of Time, Money And Manpower) - unless you suspect it to have been a PR exercise, in which case it succeeded brilliantly, religiously following the line the justice department wants Jane and John Doe - and you - to believe

Then came details of raids on five private homes in Texas, New York, and Wisconsin, and against one ISP.


The case is continuing and we'll tell the whole story - the real story - when it's all over.

 

[IHateMyJob2004]

So, what happens if you are sharing nothing more than live Phish shows which is legal or other "legal" material? You know hte morons at the DOJ will go after you.

 

[Czar]

There was a simmilar raid here in Iceland a month ago or so.

A private hub of about 100 users was targeted and 10-12 people were raided and everything computer releated was siezed as evidence, even consoles. This hub had around 30-35tb of total data and it required a username and password to enter.
Meanwhile an open hub with a very public homepage ( www.deilir.is ) was left untouched. That hub had around 3500 users online all the time and somewhat over 10.000 unique users over a 1 month time. Total data was around 200tb. Both of these hubs had just icelandic people in them, and Iceland has a population of 290.000 people, and regardless of this huge numbers of dc users cd and movie sales have gone up in the past years after going down in the .com burst which effected us all.
http://www.netfrelsi.is/gamalt...10/oloeglegt_niurh.php
more detail there,
( Green graph shows rentals, Purple graph shows movies sold, Other graph shows music cd sales -blue is local music -orange is foreign music )

Catagorizing the big file shares as the worst bunch is just a crock of shít. The entertainiment industry is always saying that they have lost millions of sales because of file sharing if that is their argument then a small group of big sharers who are for the most part just collectors is not nearly as much a big loss then the huge number of casual users.

Anyway the case is very very iffy in terms of how they got access to the hub and how they gathered evedence and how the laws are about this subject, no DMCA here.

and finaly,
http://www-m.isnic.is/status/rix/galag/galag.html
check out the overview graph for the last year. The dip there is when the raid was and everyone sharing shut down their hubs, ftp servers and everything else people were using. The reason for the rise is that the big hub went online again a week later but not nearly as many users there as before.

 

[dchakrab]

Um...what happens if you're sharing digital video content which you own the copyright to, or which is public domain? I've had easily over 100 GB of shares on DC++ before, all completely legal. This is NOT a large share size for someone who works with digital video, believe me.

Also, DC++ hubs tend to specify that the owner of the hub takes no responsibility for material posted by users, and that if you are affiliated with any law enforcement authority or organisation, you must leave the hub immediately, according to act something or the other signed by Clinton. I'm guessing there was some majorly shady "undercover" work that just grabbed the IP's of a couple of the biggest sharers, and then got arrest warrants. It would be even sadder of a couple of those guys were lamers with faked share sizes.

One more argument to leave the country...

-Dave.

 

[RobCur]

Originally posted by: ntdz
im sick of ashcroft going after warez people, there are more important people to get than teens downloading music and games they wouldnt buy anyway

True, they go after your dogs too if it was getting free food.

 

[Drift3r]

LOL - You got love John Ashcroft !! Protecting America from pimple faced teen-age geeks and nude statues.

 

[Bozo Galora]

Posted Dec 10, 2004, 3:03 PM ET by David Touve

The question of whether p2p allications violate copyright laws will be dealt with by the US Supreme Court. The side of the issue, as quoted by News.com, say it all:

?There are seminal issues before the court?the future of the creative industries and legitimate Internet commerce,? Mitch Bainwol, chief executive officer of the Recording Industry Association of America, said in a statement. ?These are questions not about a particular technology, but the abuse of that technology by practitioners of a parasitical business model.?
?There?s a lot more at stake here for the technology industry than for the copyright industry,? said Fred von Lohmann, an Electronic Frontier Foundation attorney who has represented StreamCast Networks on the issue. ?This case will not be determinant of the future of peer to peer around the world, but it will be determinant of the future of a whole host of future digital products.?


http://p2p.weblogsinc.com/entry/1234000770023298/

1. Posted Dec 11, 2004, 9:51 AM ET by David
Bram Cohen has used these exact words in interviews before. BT is not an anonymous sharing platform. And there is no way the MPAA could sue over BT, seeing as the system is really a way to swarm files... sharing occurs only when users list Torrent files in public.

4. Posted Dec 19, 2004, 9:46 AM ET by Marvin
I can confirm Jonathan Rynd's comment. My ISP turned off my connection the other day due to a notice given to them regarding copyright infringement that I can only assume came from an organization like the RIAA or MPAA. So these organizations may not be suing individuals directly (yet?) but it looks like they are very concerned about Bit Torrent and from news I've been seeing recently they are rather aggressive.

http://p2p.weblogsinc.com/entry/1234000453023345

 

[conehead433]

It does seem like Ashcroft and Co. going after downloaders is overkill. Let the MPAA and RIAA pay their own way towards curbing downloading. I guess they feel like they need to go after someone. Looks like they would go after the overseas pirates who copy and distribute billions of dollars worth of movies, CDs, and illegal software. At this point I don't understand why the movie and tv industries have not come up with a way to allow legal downloads at a reasonable cost that a user could then burn to disc and own.