backtop

Print 50 comment(s) - last by Funksultan.. on Apr 4 at 2:20 PM
Limewire with BitTorrent client seen as the last straw

The cast of characters surrounding BitTorrent’s ongoing drama just gained another actor, with the British Phonographic Industry (BPI) now entering the fray.

With the bundling of a BitTorrent client inside recent versions of Limewire, says BPI anti-piracy investigator Jollyon Benn, the protocol is easier to use than ever before. “The latest version of Limewire … [is] much more friendly. It is opening it up to a lot of people, [and] it all comes down to how easy it is to do these things,” says Benn.

“We talk to a lot of people who say ‘we thought that [downloading music] was legal…because we got the premium version of LimeWire.’ It is one of our challenges to make people understand the implications of what they are doing,” he added.

The BPI says it is now working on taking down the larger BitTorrent networks, working in partnership with IFPI. Spearheading its newfound push will be a phalanx of “bots and agents,” which it says will be used to sniff out illegal activity in an automated fashion.

The initiative may also be timed with the recording industry’s slow-but-steady migration away from DRM-encoded music, which Benn concedes to be frustrating for consumers. “We [are now at a] stage where people are replacing those first-generation MP3 players … if they are unable to listen to their recordings because they are bound up to a particular DRM they are going to get pretty fed-up,” says Benn.

Instead, the BPI seems to anticipate a surge of piracy as people try to freely distribute content that trades DRM for watermarking.

According to TorrentFreak, the BPI will continue its policy of not bothering with the “petty filesharers,” which according to its definition, consists of users who share less than a couple hundred tracks. Instead, its new developments will be centered around patrolling “networks sharing hundreds of thousands of tracks,” a move that TorrentFreak considers curious given that “most BitTorrent trackers are located outside the ‘jurisdiction’ of the BPI,” as in “not in the UK.”

“Granted, this didn’t stop them working with the IFPI to shut down OiNK in the Netherlands,” writes TorrentFreak blogger enigmax, “[but] there certainly aren’t many UK-hosted BitTorrent trackers and the number of British BitTorrent administrators … is unclear.”

Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
Stupid BPI
By ForumMaster on 3/29/2008 10:54:53 AM , Rating: 3
First, limewire isn't the first P2P client with bit-torrent. Shareaza, for example, has had it for years.

But second, why does the BPI think that they have jurisdication outside of the UK? besides, while bit-torrent is used for pirated content, it is also used for legitimate purposes.




RE: Stupid BPI
By BladeVenom on 3/29/2008 10:58:53 AM , Rating: 5
Probably the same reason the RIAA thinks they have jurisdiction outside the USA. They can afford to bribe politicians.


RE: Stupid BPI
By walk2k on 3/29/08, Rating: 0
RE: Stupid BPI
By Pandamonium on 3/29/2008 5:08:52 PM , Rating: 5
There's a fuzzy line between downloading and importing bits. If it's legal for a Russian business on Russian soil to sell intellectual property, a US downloader is arguably importing legal material.


RE: Stupid BPI
By eye smite on 3/29/08, Rating: 0
RE: Stupid BPI
By walk2k on 3/29/2008 8:10:39 PM , Rating: 1
Only if they are in Russia!

If they are in the US they are subject to US laws, period.

So let's review.

A US resident, breaking US law, on US soil, stealing from a US company, by downloading a movie from other p2p users, many of which are certainly also in the US.

How does Russian law enter into any of this? Oh, it doesn't.


RE: Stupid BPI
By Funksultan on 4/1/2008 7:47:25 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
There's a fuzzy line between downloading and importing bits. If it's legal for a Russian business on Russian soil to sell intellectual property, a US downloader is arguably importing legal material.


I'm wondering how you could possibly argue that...

Lemme know how well you're doing importing boxes of "legal" pot from Amsterdam.

Just because it's legal somewhere else, doesn't make it legal here.

</common sense>


RE: Stupid BPI
By Topweasel on 4/3/2008 10:18:51 AM , Rating: 2
People keep trying to act like Copyright infringement is like any other crime. Its not, its copyright infringement.

Pot is illegal to own. Music MP3's are not. Whether the source had the legal right to give it to me shouldn't matter. That's why they are supposed to go after the uploaders not the downloaders. Now if the uploaders are in another country you have to get that countries authorities involved depending on your agreements with said country on IP infringement. That's probably why they are looking for guys sharing thousands because going after each uploader would take forever.


RE: Stupid BPI
By Funksultan on 4/4/2008 2:20:12 PM , Rating: 2
Again, you are completely missing the point. It's the method of gaining the method in question, not just the material.

So, in your mind "Possession of stolen goods" shouldn't be a crime, huh?

If you don't think Copyright Infringement is a crime, you need to spend a little time with Vanilla Ice. Ask him how that all worked out for him.

The law is pretty clear on all of this. If you have questions, read first, then ask. Please.


RE: Stupid BPI
By Alexstarfire on 3/30/2008 10:52:06 AM , Rating: 2
OK, I guess people can't read the article. They aren't going after individuals, they are going after networks. Though, I'm not exactly sure what they mean by that since it's not like BitTorrent has sub networks. Perhaps they mean they are going after the sites hosting the trackers, or the trackers themselves. Hard to say since they only say they are going after "networks that share hundreds of thousands of tracks."


RE: Stupid BPI
By 3kliksphilip on 3/29/08, Rating: 0
RE: Stupid BPI
By kmmatney on 3/29/2008 11:31:38 AM , Rating: 2
Agreed. I would guess that legitimate downloads on bit torrent are well below 1% of total use.


RE: Stupid BPI
By Screwballl on 3/29/2008 11:46:08 AM , Rating: 5
I think you have this completely backwards.
If guns are outlawed then only outlaws will have guns, this is the same line of thinking that RIAA and MPAA is taking. Thinking that you can take away the guns and the ammo and it will stop the illegal activity is complete stupidity.
In reality, bittorrent (and guns) have very legal uses and many/most cases are used for legal purposes. It is those illegal users that are giving it a bad name.

I think that BPI is PARTIALLY on the right track here by forcing the hosts that handle the seeds, torrent files and originating illegal files that should be shut down. Cut out the source of the illegal content and bittorrent continues to be the access method for legal file sharing but at a much higher rate than previously.
Of course the main problem is that anything on the internet is very resilient. Remove one site and 2 more popup in its place... shut down 200 of them and 400 new ones popup. They need to go after certain content providers like Pirate Bay and similar hosts to get the illegal content removed, not the entire site.
With this in mind, it is also an uphill fight. Education is a much more powerful tool than brute force is, but many times a combination of the two is needed to get a job done. Educate the populace worldwide and you will see a much stronger response than just shutting a few major "link warehouses" down.


RE: Stupid BPI
By HrilL on 3/29/2008 11:59:08 AM , Rating: 5
while that maybe be true with bit torrent. I can't agree with your gun analogy that has been proven just not true. Bad guys still get the guns through illegal channels... And now that I think about it the same will happen with bit torrent. It will just move from the public trackers to smaller private ones that they'll never catch. So there efforts are futile.


RE: Stupid BPI
By Strunf on 3/29/08, Rating: 0
RE: Stupid BPI
By poohbear on 3/29/08, Rating: 0
RE: Stupid BPI
By Gatoral65 on 3/29/2008 4:11:32 PM , Rating: 2
Hmm, I just cannot agree with that logic... perhaps in utopia restricting guns from everyone will mean bad guys do not have access to them. What is stopping individuals with bad intentions from stealing them from law enforcement or the military?

What about the level of deterrent that exists by not knowing if someone has a gun. If I was a criminal that had a gun and I know that no one else has one, the risk of me getting shot or otherwise confronted decreases greatly, because only cops have weapons. There are certainly fewer cops than there are civilians.

At the same time perhaps we should outlaw cars, knives, rope , and anything else an individual can use as a tool for criminal activity.

At the end of the day each of these items has a reasonable use, and the individual that uses them to harm someone else is at fault not the item itself.


RE: Stupid BPI
By StevoLincolnite on 3/29/2008 4:51:02 PM , Rating: 3
Guns are banned in Australia, and it has worked rather well in decreasing the death toll via gun related incidents, be it accident or malicious, by making it "Harder to get" allot of people don't bother.


RE: Stupid BPI
By rsmech on 3/29/2008 10:36:57 PM , Rating: 3
I will give you the point that it appears death tolls via guns are decreasing, but the most striking statistic is this. The Australian Gov't reports that what you said is true for hand guns, but the point many of us are making is that criminals will still have the guns.

quote:
# In 2004-05, there were 40 firearm homicides (15%); 16 involved handguns.


quote:
Only 2 handguns were registered; one to the victim, and one to the offender.


That means 14 out of 16 were illegal possession of a fire arm. The criminals still have the guns. So you bring up deaths, how many other crimes do these illegal guns contribute to such as rap, robbery, violent crimes? As you can see the criminals still have them.


RE: Stupid BPI
By StevoLincolnite on 3/30/2008 5:42:59 AM , Rating: 2
I never said they didn't, but you are missing my point - The amount of death tolls dropped significantly when the Howard Government made Guns Illegal, probably the only decent thing John Howard ever did.

Just like a house security system, there is "Always a way around it", Nothing is ever fool proof.


RE: Stupid BPI
By Oregonian2 on 3/31/2008 3:47:22 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
it has worked rather well in decreasing the death toll via gun related incidents


Has the total death toll gone down, or has it just shifted from guns to perhaps knives?


RE: Stupid BPI
By TheDoc9 on 3/31/2008 6:13:50 PM , Rating: 2
whats so interesting about this conversation is how everyone is somehow likening guns to file sharing. One of which causes death and physical harm, the other allows people to enjoy music.

You should definitely be punished for enjoying copied music.


RE: Stupid BPI
By dever on 4/2/2008 3:42:33 PM , Rating: 2
Ah yes, the we're better off because we're safer argument. Many governments have used this throughout history to repress their citizens. Fortunately, in the United States, the founders were well aware of history, and quickly amended the constitution to make sure citizens always have the right to arm themselves.

Why? Why would they put gun ownership as a right, in the constitution, no less? Not because it's "safer." That really doesn't matter. Government is not here to make me safer by restricting my freedoms. If that were the case, they could make me safer by forcing me to wear a helmet in the shower. Instead, gun rights are there to insure that citizens are not taken advantage of by their government. This is the sole reason... and a darn good one.


RE: Stupid BPI
By Strunf on 3/30/2008 8:51:39 AM , Rating: 1
Do you imply all the guns that are sold on the black market come from the army or the law enforcement stocks? if that's the case you guys have some serious security problems...

Level of deterrent? if you look around the world the US still has an homicide rate (by firearm) much higher than any other developed country, I don't know if this results cause the other countries have banned guns or restricted its access, but your level of deterrent doesn't seem to work that well when compared to other countries, actually the US ranks around the top in most crime statistics.

I wonder what's the "reasonable use" of a gun...
True it's the individual that commits the crime and not the weapon, however one cannot deny that the easier it is to commit a crime the more it will be committed, this is like speed limitations, everyone breaks them cause they won't get caught had we put law enforcement tools (radar or other) everywhere chances are most people would respect the speed limits.


RE: Stupid BPI
By eye smite on 3/30/2008 9:51:31 AM , Rating: 1
It's the same argument it's been for at least 30 yrs or more. The amount of crimes or suicides by gun compated to the total population of America is very small. It gets equally small when compared to how many people do own guns. There's no perfect solution and never will be. We've had guns in this country since it's inception over 200 yrs ago. It's not going to change anytime soon, if it ever does change. I for one will not give up my firearms for any liberal or politician that feels threatened by a handful of people. Law Enforcement in this country was originally developed to keep the peace, not protect individuals. It's the duty of every citizen here to defend themselves actually. So, while many people seem irrationally afraid of guns, I still argue they should be more afraid of cars in general and drunk drivers. More people are killed in auto crashes and by drunk drivers every year than by guns, by a much larger percentage. If you want to regulate something in a more stringent fashion, regulate who can drive and what kind of tests they have to pass to EARN the privilege of driving.......


RE: Stupid BPI
By Strunf on 3/30/2008 5:09:45 PM , Rating: 1
"The amount of crimes or suicides by gun compated to the total population of America is very small."
Yes but even in crime per capita it stills higher than in any other developed country.


RE: Stupid BPI
By eye smite on 3/31/2008 12:37:54 AM , Rating: 2
Ok, you already stated that once, and it doesn't change anything. I've already stated there is no perfect system for any country anywhere in the world. I've posted links further down citing what can happen when you don't have a gun, and the woman in the first link was killed by someone that did not have a gun. In the second link the homeowner had a gun and defended himself just fine at age 71. Criminals do not need a gun to come in your house and kill you, but if they break into your house without a gun, and you have one. I can almost predict who will live and who won't. Until you find a way to mentally neuter that part of the brain that motivates criminals to do what they do, guns in America will always be necessary.


RE: Stupid BPI
By Strunf on 3/31/08, Rating: -1
RE: Stupid BPI
By Ringold on 3/29/2008 6:20:07 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Im sorry but the red neck's "gun collection hobby" or "hunting hobby" can take a backseat to the safety of the general public.


First of all, a giant "Screw you" for assuming anyone that would dare arm themselves so that they arent helpless children if the Nanny State Police Force can't arrive at warp speed must therefore be a redneck.

Second of all, there's this thing called the Constitution, and its Bill of Rights. Ever give it a read? By the way, Wikipedia is, for once, extremely insightful with its discussion of the ablative absolute it. Translating the phrase used in the constitution from a Latin-like construction to something closer to our contemporary English, it reads more like this: "Since we need a militia, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

Third, and applicable to this discussion on BitTorrent, <sarcasm> we all know that no armed crime takes place in D.C. at all. </sarcasm>


RE: Stupid BPI
By cmdrdredd on 3/30/2008 12:33:05 AM , Rating: 2
Then explain why Washington DC has some of the HIGHEST violent crime rates using guns in the entire country, but has outlawed the average citizen from even owning one. Tell me how that works. I bet you can't for the fact that outlawing anything solves NOTHING.


RE: Stupid BPI
By BikeDude on 3/30/2008 8:30:17 AM , Rating: 3
Maybe it is as simple as this: You have to ban guns for the entire state/country. If you can get guns in the next town/city and don't have to cross any controlled borders, the threshold for buying one is very low.

In civilized countries, strict gun laws help. The problem is that the US of A is still the wild, wild west. Arming every citizen isn't going to change that. You've tried that for a very long time now! (BTW: Compare the number of gun-related murders per capita with other countries)

Cars don't kill people. Bad drivers kill people. But not restricting who gets a driver license is just plain silly. (oh dear, I forgot: Americans have very easy access to driver's licenses as well! It is fortunate that most of your roads are very wide and straight)


RE: Stupid BPI
By Alexstarfire on 3/30/2008 11:11:43 AM , Rating: 2
No kidding. I've told several people that if people in Taiwan drove like they did in America, they'd all get killed. Well, not EVERYONE, but I think you get the idea.

I know several people that got driver licenses and can't even drive. Course, shortly after they received the license they promptly got into an accident.

The tests we have are far too easy. Plus, why is parallel parking still on the driving test? Counts for a pretty large portion of the test, but is hardly ever used, unless you live in the city. Even then it's still not THAT common.


RE: Stupid BPI
By HrilL on 3/31/2008 2:36:38 AM , Rating: 2
When was the last time you took a driving test? Here in California parallel parking has been off the test for at least 10 years now.


RE: Stupid BPI
By HrilL on 3/31/2008 2:34:13 AM , Rating: 2
Do you not realize the same thing goes for guns? Guns don't kill people. People do. There is absolutely no reason why I shouldn't be able to go Skeet, trap, and target shooting. Not to mention hunting. Shooting is even an Olympic sport. There are a lot of perfectly fine reasons for owning guns. What you don't seem to get is any tool when used in the wrong way can become a weapon. But we don't go on banning Knives, Golf clubs, Baseball bats, cars, and just about every other thing that can be used to kill someone. And when people claim people die of accidents from guns its because those people were not educated on gun safety and if that would be added as a course in school then everyone would know how to be safe with guns. I believe some schools do have such programs.


RE: Stupid BPI
By eye smite on 3/30/08, Rating: 0
RE: Stupid BPI
By Screwballl on 3/31/2008 2:16:41 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
i totally disagree with the gun analogy, restricting access to guns DOES reduce their availability and subsequent gun related crimes. Alot of guns used for illegal purposes were originally purchased legally or stolen from someone who purchased them legally, so restrictions are needed to stop ALL people except police/military from accessing them.


Sorry but that is as dumb as saying the best way to stop online crime is taking away people's computers. Go ahead, throw yours in the trash and never touch a computer again. By owning a computer so you contribute to online crime, even if you do not have internet access.

See how dumb these statements really are??


RE: Stupid BPI
By Woollaa on 3/31/2008 4:12:37 PM , Rating: 1
"by poohbear on March 29, 2008 at 1:41 PM

i totally disagree with the gun analogy, restricting access to guns DOES reduce their availability and subsequent gun related crimes. Alot of guns used for illegal purposes were originally purchased legally or stolen from someone who purchased them legally, so restrictions are needed to stop ALL people except police/military from accessing them. i'd rather prevent the 3/10 people that want to use guns for illegal purposes by restricting ALL 10 people from purchasing them. Im sorry but the red neck's "gun collection hobby" or "hunting hobby" can take a backseat to the safety of the general public. Find a new hobby or just buy your meat from the supermarket like everyone else for fucks sake."

"3/10 people," huh. So you think that many out of 10 are used for nefarious purposes?
I had to sign up just to comment on this retarded line of thinking--that outlawing GUNS would make people safer. It will make people safer, but not you or me. Only those in power. You probably ....forget it, you are an oxygen thief.
You are such a naive, socialist idiot. People like you are too involved in their own fears and self-oriented interests to understand any adult situation that isn't spelled out for you by some politician. Ask citizens of the UK how they feel about being prosecuted if they keep a bat beside their bed to defend against home invaders and thieves. Australia, a while back, had a mandatory gun-turn-in, check out what crime is like over there. We all lose when the cowards are allowed the largest say, the loudest voices. When cowards shape our societies to coddle their insecurities and replace personal responsibility with absolute control, no one wins.
You have probably never been a victim of anything in your entire life, have you poohbear?

Oh, and bittorrent will only die when it is replaced by something better and easier to use. So education and alternative marketing is the "industry's" best defense.

Ok, end of rant.

PS - sorry for taking so much space, but I hate people who want the government to do everything for them.


RE: Stupid BPI
By Woollaa on 3/31/08, Rating: 0
RE: Stupid BPI
By FaceMaster on 3/29/08, Rating: 0
RE: Stupid BPI
By eye smite on 3/29/2008 8:51:30 PM , Rating: 2
I'm certain it's not limited to bittorrent. The history channel sells the documentaries they sell online, however I have 2 of their documentaries that I didn't pay for. I downloaded them off of youtube with a youtube downloader. You're always going to face this issue. If someone buys a legal copy of something then decides to copy it then uploads it to youtube who's to blame? Me for downloading, the person that uploaded it, or youtube for hosting it? Far as I'm concerned even if I hadn't downloaded it, the whole documentary is there to watch on youtube, so how can they hold me liable for something youtube is clearly displaying for all to see free? That's a tough question isn't it, cause you could easily walk both sides of that one.


RE: Stupid BPI
By Alexstarfire on 3/30/2008 11:15:52 AM , Rating: 2
That's the worst logic EVER.


RE: Stupid BPI
By omnicronx on 3/29/2008 3:06:13 PM , Rating: 2
Why you compare a program most people have never heard of to a popular piece of software like limewire I do not know.. The Ford Model T sure as hell wasnt the first car, but it was the first mass produced and well known car for its time..

Everyone knows limewire, and it should be seen as a much larger threat than 'shareaza', a program most people don't even know exists. BT in limewire will make a big impact on illegal filesharing, theres no doubt about that..


RE: Stupid BPI
By Flunk on 3/30/2008 3:59:55 AM , Rating: 2
The whole shame of it is that Limewire is a horrible spyware-infested mess of a program and Shareaza is an open-source project with some neat ideas.

For some reason the quality software always gets lost in the sea of mediocrity. And realistically Limewire adding BT support means nothing. This is just an excuse for functionally irrelevant agency to justify its existence.


i thought that said "british pornographic industry"
By ObiDon on 3/29/2008 12:08:50 PM , Rating: 5
... and i was going to say that all we have to do is not download british porn and we'd be safe. plus, as an added bonus, we'd stand a greater chance of actually being aroused ;)




By conrad13a on 3/30/2008 8:06:07 PM , Rating: 1
I'm guessing you're not a fan of British humour either.

keep
it
real


By P4blo on 3/31/2008 5:11:26 AM , Rating: 2
It's regulated, not exactly fair to compare it to Dutch or Scandinavian porn. You can't show any beaver or penetration.


By ObiDon on 3/31/2008 7:11:48 AM , Rating: 2
sure i am... you don't have to be attractive to be funny ;)


What is Limewire?
By the goat on 3/31/2008 8:40:36 AM , Rating: 2
This article should include an explanation about what Limewire is. I have no idea what it is and the article is garbage without that information. To me Limewire sounds like a clothing line sold at "hot topic". But I'm guessing it isn't.




RE: What is Limewire?
By 4wardtristan on 4/3/2008 2:36:01 AM , Rating: 2
limewire is a p2p program, essentially the same thing as

kazaa

bearshare

winmx

grokester

imesh

and all those other rubbish programs that i have found come riddled with spyware and other useless garbage...they may not anymore, but thats cause i havent touched them in ages (and have left school, not as much free tech support THANK GOD)

sorry - i have built up a large hate towards thse programs..i cannot count the amount of times i have cleaned up pc's due to <insert-p2p-program-here>..


British Pornographic Industry
By phxfreddy on 4/1/2008 4:10:02 PM , Rating: 2
I did not know there was a British Pornographic Industry as it seems there is quite a selection of really ugly people living there.




"It looks like the iPhone 4 might be their Vista, and I'm okay with that." -- Microsoft COO Kevin Turner











botimage
Copyright 2012 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki