CNet's Declan McCullagh breaks down the trial and why the verdict came back as "guilty."Yesterday was kind of a sad day for the file-sharing community after a jury of twelve returned with a guilty verdict in the first ever illegal file-sharing case to see the inside of an actual courtroom. The Jury ordered Jammie Thomas to pay some $9,250 for each of the 24 songs she was accused of illegally sharing on the KaZaA file-sharing network. This amounts to some $222,000 in total penalties, a figure sure to cause headaches until she appeals her case. Interestingly enough, CNet's Declan McCullagh has written an article that breaks down the 4 reasons why he thinks the jury sided with the RIAA and found Thomas guilty of copyright infringement to the tune of $220,000. Now the article leans towards why it resulted in the penalty amount that it did, but I'm going to focus on the three reasons why according to him the RIAA won period . "Four reasons why the RIAA won a jury verdict of $220,000"1. The RIAA was able to match a username and IP address with Thomas.2. The RIAA's jury instructions.Basically the RIAA told the jury that either downloading or uploading music is illegal, making it easier for them to get her coming or going so to speak.
3. "Making available."Here all they had to do was prove she had music in KaZaA's pesky "shared folder." The RIAA didn't have to prove that anybody actually downloaded anything from her only that people "could." Kinda scary. So it would seem that the verdict was pretty straightforward, but if you notice there's some glaring loopholes that can be exploited here. As Ray Beckerman of Recording Industry vs The People even noted, " We can only hope so. By the way, here's nice refresher article called "Tips on how to not get busted for file-sharing" that I wrote a while back. As usual, you Usenet cats have nothing to worry about, but you Direct Connect users out there need to become more aware of the dangers and switch up now for heavens sake! Here's a guide to BitTorrent to get you started. Looking for more stuff to watch or download?
|
 
|
|
Couldn't agree more....ANY centralized p2p program and even some un centralized ones are in danger of comming under attack. .
RIAA get a f*ckin' grip of your senses!
I'm donating something. Not much, but it's all i can afford at the moment. Somethings better than nothing right?
http://freejammie.com/
Then, to be sure, use an external hard drive to save your files (you can share from it to, but only while you are monitoring it...not a good idea to keep it running 24-7.) Then, when you are done, remove the external drive. Now, no illegal files are on your main hard drive.
Then, to be really sure, erase all evidence of your activity each time you go on by using Windows Washer or some other program that clears the memory.
The people who are getting caught are quite simply not paying attention.
Anyone know how they "proved" that a wireless router couldn't be involved? (Besides paying off the judge and jury).
“Here is a summary of UMG's torrent testing for this week. The effectiveness for Amy Winehouse is at 40% compared to 37% last week. Colbie Caillat is at 90% from 78%, and Common increased to 73% from 63%. However, Lyle Lovett dropped to 96% from 100% last week. Everything seems to be positive except for the drop…” This basically describes the percentage of files that were decoys that appear when a user searches. For some files, only decoys were available. An example is the screenshot where the top 10 results for Kanye West’s Good Morning were all fake file. An email about this said: “I'm seeing our decoys flood right now for "kanye west good morning." The top 10 results are us. The attached screen cap shows what it looks like on my laptop right now. The file is real for 45 seconds, then goes to crap and sounds skippy, glitchy, etc.”
If I'm reading this correct, at times they are flooding with "decoy" files and sometimes the rate is at 100% of the files available are fake.
This alone casts serious doubt as if the RIAA can really determine if a file is truly the copyright piece in question or just something with a fake name etc.