p2pnet - rss feed: RIAA, MPAA, bust university’s ‘file sharing’ printer
p2pnet news P2P:- | RIAA” | MPAA News:- “We reverse engineer copyright enforcement in the popular BitTorrent file sharing network and find that a common approach for identifying infringing users is not conclusive,” say Michael Piatek, Tadayoshi Kohno and Arvind Krishnamurthy.
Not conclusive? A mistake, surely.
After all, Vivendi Universal, EMI, Warner Music and Sony BMG [read RIAA] and Time Warner, Viacom, Fox, Sony, NBC Universal and Disney [read MPAA] are religiously using ‘evidence’ of alleged ‘copyright infringement’ to shut down sites such as BitTorrent tracker TorrentSpy, and to sue their own customers.
However, “With the obvious flaws and inconclusive evidence provided by indirect detection, it is not very believable that these self-appointed copyright cops are unaware of the high probability that they implicate innocent people,” say the researchers, describing, “simple techniques for implicating arbitrary network endpoints in illegal content sharing and demonstrate the effectiveness of these techniques experimentally, attracting real DMCA complaints for nonsense devices, e.g., IP printers and a wireless access point.”
Their statements come in University of Washington Technical Report, UW-CSE-08-06-01, intriguingly entitled Challenges and Directions for Monitoring P2P File Sharing Networks with, even more intriguingly, Why My Printer Received a DMCA Takedown Notice, as the sub-title.
They also say, “The current state of P2P monitoring and enforcement is clearly not ideal. The potential for false positives and implication of arbitrary addresses undermines the credibility of monitoring and creates a significant inconvenience for misidentified users (if not financial and/or legal penalties).” [See the chart below, lifted from the paper.]
The researchers conclude >>>>
Although content providers are increasingly relying on systematic monitoring of P2P networks as a basis for deterring copyright infringement, some currently used methods of identifying infringing users are not conclusive.
Through extensive measurement of tens of thousands of BitTorrent swarms and analysis of hundreds of DMCA complaints, we have shown that a malicious user can implicate arbitrary network endpoints in copyright infringement, and additional false positives may arise due to buggy software or timing effects.
We have further demonstrated that IP blacklists, a standard method for avoiding systematic monitoring, are wholly ineffective given current identification techniques and provide only limited coverage of likely monitoring agents.
These observations build our understanding of current challenges and potential next steps for all parties involved in P2P sharing: enforcement agencies, ISPs, and users.
In more detail, “The copyright thieves, I mean culprits that were implicated: networked printers, a wireless access point, and a desktop computer without any infringing content on it,” says AudioHolics, going on:
“Of course, we all know that printers enjoy downloading and watching the latest Hollywood blockbusters without paying for them as much as anyone does.”
Piatek, Kohno and Krishnamurthy show how different scenarios demonstrate how a tracker can, “end up with the wrong IP address by forgery or error, how the wrong computer can be associated to an IP address, or how a computer can be unknowingly used for file sharing,” says the story, to wit >>>
- Certain trackers allow clients to specify alternate an IP address for files to allow compatibility with proxy servers and network address translation (NAT)
- Tracker metadata is user generated and can be altered to include any arbitrary IP address as a peer
- IP address are reallocated to other users on public Wi-Fi when a previous P2P user fails to disconnect properly from the torrent
- Tracker responses to queries are unencrypted, allowing for interception and alteration by anyone between transmission points
- Malware running on a machine that hosts or downloads infringing content
- An open network access point that is used by other to transfer infringing content
During the experiment, “the researchers were able to frame a random collection of networked devices at the University of Washington that were incapable of infringement by simply providing incorrect IP addresses to the trackers,” says AudioHolics, and:
“Because they never provided any infringing files to the torrent trackers, all of the DMCA notices that they received could only come from indirect detection.
“Direct detection eliminates the possible false positives because an erroneous address will not have any infringing files available for download. So, with all the possible sources of error, why are content providers and their watchdogs relying on unreliable methods?”
The story adds >>>
Direct detection of file sharing for copyright infringement is bandwidth and effort intensive, i.e. it costs more. After identifying an IP address with potentially infringing content, someone has to take the time to download the file and it has to be stored somewhere. This would quickly add up over the many possible occurrences and the costs to catch actual copyright infringement are then multiplied further by downloading the false positives.
It’s far easier to find a place were crimes might be committed and start accusing anyone they happen to find in the vicinity.
The flipside to sending out DMCA notices to prevent illegal file sharing is that it is technically also illegal to send out bogus notices under Section 512(f) which provides penalties for knowing misrepresentation of copyright claims.
With the obvious flaws and inconclusive evidence provided by indirect detection, it is not very believable that these self-appointed copyright cops are unaware of the high probability that they implicate innocent people.
It’s nice to see that organizations like the MPAA and the RIAA don’t mind breaking the law to ensnare innocent people in their effort to prevent illegal copyright infringement as a cost saving measure all to enhance the corporate bottom line.
Stay tuned.
.
.Stumble It!
shut down - Hollywood kills TorrentSpy, March 27, 2008
AudioHolics - Researchers get MPAA/RIAA to bust a Printer for P2P File Sharing, June 16, 2008
Use free p2pnet newsfeeds for your site. It’s really easy!Subscribe to p2pnet.net | | rss feed: http://p2pnet.net/p2p.rss | | Mobile - http://p2pnet.net/index-wml.php
Net access blocked by government restrictions? Use Psiphon from the Citizen Lab at the University of Toronto. Go here for details. Download here.
June 18th, 2008 at 1:45 am
The time has come for my printer to be incarcerated. Take it away boys. The bad printer is out of ink anyway and will be cheaper to buy another. If you find its captured and stored any music you can have that too.
June 18th, 2008 at 2:08 pm
Darn! When I saw the title, I thought this would be a followup story where the RIAA is confronted with the fact that they tried to extort money from a non-sentient device.
July 2nd, 2008 at 8:43 am
[…] and in some cases, impossible, to provide such direct proof". So difficult, in fact, that printers and wireless access points were accused of violating copyright laws with absolutely no effort made to determine what sort of […]