I’d also like to mention that using Explorer is, in my opinion, an absolutely HORRIBLE way to “explore” your system. Windows hides a *LOT* of things from the user and using Explorer always feels to me, like trying to navigate a maze with blinders on. I prefer a good two-pane file manager like Total Commander. Another tip; Instead of using RegEdit’s slow and cumbersome search, export the entire registry to a file, then view it with the viewer/editor of your choice. You can’t directly edit the registry that way, but searching for the name of the P2P program you uninstalled to see if any mention of it was left behind will be about 50x faster and then you can use that as a reference in RegEdit.

Also, I decided to see what drive erasing programs I could find and I found this one;

http://www.tolvanen.com/eraser/
http://www.heidi.ie/eraser/

It’s free and will overwrite the free space on drives. It says it will even blank out the left over directory entries of previously deleted files. The first site is the original author’s, the second is from the new maintainer.

Anyway, its probably a moot point, as neither you nor I are likely to receive a complaint from the RIAA. Still, it doesn’t hurt to have a backup plan.

Are you sure about that? While it IS true that hard drive platters retain some faint magnetic traces of previous data that has been overwritten, I’m not aware of any consumer level hard drive in use today that can read those traces. Everything I’ve read has indicated that to read those traces requires that the drive be dis-assembled and the platters placed in a machine that costs more than most people make in their lifetime. Beyond the cost associated with doing this, I doubt that the RIAA/MPAA are going to tear apart the hard drive of a potentially innocent victim.

Everything I’ve read indicates that the standard procedure is to make an image copy of the drive. This means that the drive itself is responsible for reading the data off its platters. Since a hard drive can only read whatever data is currently recorded in each sector and not what was overwritten, the question becomes whether or not any incriminating data would be missed by wiping the free space and overwriting it by installing games and such.

Besides the obvious (audio/video files, P2P apps, etc) you would also need to erase the registry backups, the swap file, IE’s index.dat files, etc. Once that’s done, wiping the free space on the drive will overwrite the space previously used by these files. A good program will use random data for each sector, making it look like part of an unknown file. Then, installing other programs such as games will overwrite the random data with data belonging to the games. I even have a collection of save files for various games that can be used to make it appear as if the games have been played.

What have I missed?

I’m not a lawyer, but based on my limited understanding of the law, this should go a long way towards making the RIAA’s job that much more difficult in proving your guilt. Of course, that doesn’t mean that they won’t assume it anyway.

My area has many flats nearby..
I just installed a very modest 5dBi boost aerial and can actually see (and connect or attempt connect) around 8 different access points!!! Some might even live close enough to an institution (pub, coffee shop etc.) that has wifi access installed for its customers. Cough…

To compound matters, some people do not even change (or know how to) the default user name and password (admin admin) to access all the router settings. On the BT default supplied boxes, this is a very serious flaw, meaning any ‘hacker’ close by can use your internet, completely deny you access to your network or the advanced settings, set up particular blocks or a DMZ and with a small stretch of technical capabilities, USE YOUR PHONE SERVICES TO CALL PREMIUM SERVICES (or whatever) without the box even showing an intrusion attempt in its log. The range is further than most realise (up to hundreds of feet, even through windows/walls, depending on equipment)

With this default roll out of BT security for the home, I don’t think those who know about the current mess and users ignorance could ever be charged with doing anything on the internet without a great deal of uncertainty. I’m sure it is the same all across Europe, the far east, Africa, Australia, America etc.

And anyway.
The rule whenever you are dragged to a hearing is to deny everything, even if you are guilty as sin, no matter the charges, UNLESS you are offered a good deal of leniency for pleading guilty. This stands for these RIAA accusations too.

Hypothetically, I think if it was me, I’d backup everything that I wanted to keep to DVD, then I’d erase it all from my HD. I’d also uninstall every P2P application and burning software, delete the browser history, cookies, saved passwords to any iffy sites, bookmarks to such sites, the recently opened file list in every media player, clean the registry and delete the backups, and anything else that references copyrighted files or P2P apps/sites. Then I’d run a free space wiping program to overwrite all the currently unused space on my HD. Finally, I’d then fill up all the free space by installing games (of which I have quite a few). Lastly, I’d swap out my CD and DVD burners for CD-ROM and DVD-ROM drives and take every CD and DVD that I’ve ever burned and ask a friend to hang onto them for me. The only piece of evidence that they’d have would be an IP address and they’d look pretty stupid dragging someone into court with nothing else to go on. If they did, I’d countersue them for harassment.

Of course, the above is just a hypothetical situation, since I always respect copyrights and I would never encourage anyone to break the law or tamper with evidence, even if it’s to avoid having your life destroyed by a greedy, soulless corporation.

Duckworth is just an evil intellectual property thief that stole this traffficking idea from others! SUE HER!!

* http://recordingindustryvspeople.blogspot.com/2007/02/elektra-v-barker-making-available-oral.html

They ask for 200K or 10 gillions dollars it chould not change anything!

YOU DON”T HAVE AND YOU SHOULD NOT GIVE THEM EVEN A PENNY!

Worst case senario Bk chapter 7 if needed! Not a big deal!

I never heard this before! It just came out or something?

Clara Duckwork What an old bitch! I she a dealer?

Download even one song “owned” by the cartels is still copyright infringement in the eyes of the court system. What the Constitution says about too harsh of a penalty does not matter since the courts long ago refuse to uphold the Constitution. What I would have done is buy a wireless router (with cash and out of town) and set it up so that it had open access. That way, there would be plausible deniability.

So the big hope is that people will cave in and just pay up rather than go through the courts to prove their innocence or the fact that it well could have been others because of the lack of good data. It’s almost like the RIAA threw a dart at the list and used that for picking out victims.

I will give them credit for being the worse PR effort the cartels could ever have come up with. I don’t want anything to do with buying music and stopped when sue’em all came to be as a boycott. Now it looks like anyone considering buying music could be a possible lawsuit victim depending on how the cartels want to interpret or twist the laws in their favor today or next week when the wind blows the other way. They are managing to turn a whole generation off to buying music. It bodes ill for their future when those students become income earners in their own right. You can hear the far off death knell tolling if you listen carefully.