BayTSP, Lionsgate, take on Wayne Nagy
p2pnet news view Freedom | P2P:- Wayne Nagy is a very ordinary guy.
He lives in Mississauga near Toronto, Ontario, where he builds guitars and I’m pretty sure he wouldn’t be upset if I say he isn’t exactly loaded with money.
And he’s definitely not a file sharer.
But he had a notice from the Rogers EUA Management Team, and another from US online bounty hunter BayTSP, accusing him of downloading a movie, or movies, by some means or another.
What means? What movie or movies? Only Rogers and BayTSP seem to know.
Because Wayne says he certainly doesn’t.
What are they talking about? – he asked himself when he first got their Stop It Or Else emails.
The only thing he could come up were some videos he’d posted on YouTube promoting his guitars, and drawing attention to concerns he’s interested in.
Movie downloads never entered his mind because, quite simply, he didn’t, and doesn’t, download movies, so when he received two emails from the companies, he didn’t know what they referred to. And Wayne assures me they’re the only ones he’s received.
Here’s part of the BayTSP missive »»»
BayTSP, Inc. (BayTSP) swears under penalty of perjury that Lionsgate Films has authorized BayTSP to act as its non-exclusive agent for copyright infringement notification. BayTSP`s search of the protocol listed below has detected infringements of Lionsgate Films copyright interests on your IP addresses as detailed in the below report.
Except they weren’t detailed below.
‘Strong arm tactics from the US entities’
Regarding the Rogers end of things, says yup no joy in a comment post »»»
This reminds me of the notice some other Rogers user got and was posted over on the DSLr-Rogers forum. Accused of downloading Mac warez when he doesn`t have a Mac. He bitched about it also.
But what can anyone do?
As sb said that`s the way it works. Notice-on-Notice. Rogers doesn`t want to hear from you. They even direct you to call the one`s who filed with them. End of story. No one in their right mind will call the one`s who filed the complaint and open dialog with the machine who wants you info and money.
Guilty or not, this is a case where you take it and leave it. Abused or not.
So it’s OK, then. Rogers and BayTSP can bully anyone anytime they feel like it and it’s cool.
Unless you’re on the sticky end of it.
“To say the least, it`s down right intimidating to be strong armed by something you can`t see nor put your finger,” Wayne said first time around.
‘I have no love of Rogers’
In our first post p2pnet reader sb states »»»
I am quite certain that the issue is NOT with what is posted on youtube. BayTSP would have gone after Youtube to pull your material down and they`d have done it: guilty until proven innocent. It wouldn`t have reached Rogers for a Notice and Notice letter that you received.
If you`re not a P2P bittorrent user, then there was a mistake made and sadly, that`s not uncommon. As for what Rogers did their involvement is this
BayTSP sees copyright material on a Rogers IP address that is available for downloading by others, so they prepare a Notice of Copyright Infringement. It is sent to Rogers.
Rogers as a part of protect our butts so we don`t get sued with our business interests in the US agrees to forward this notice to the customer using the IP address at the apparent time of the infraction. As a part of that forwarding, they send a standard warning that their terms of service do not allow users to violate copyright. Now, there`s no proof that you`ve violated copyright, only a claim by BayTSP. As a result Rogers rarely takes action other than warn you of their terms of service clause. Rogers don`t actually try to strongarm you they just forward the notice essentially saying that BayTSP has made the claim. They don`t tell BayTSP who you are, or where you are etc.
The strong arm tactics come from the US entities in this case BayTSP acting on behalf of LionsGate Films.
And in another comment, he says »»»
Believe me, I have no love of Rogers. But in this and similar cases with Notice and Notice scenarios, they are acting simply as a messenger to ensure they don`t become the target of the copyright agents since they undoubtedly have business interests in the US. Can`t blame them for that. The Notice and Notice scenario is a way of BayTSP giving you a shot across the bow since it appears they aren`t going after you any other way.
If you just installed a new router and didn`t secure it, then it`s quite possible that a neighbour has indeed connected to you, and possibly not deliberately, but inadvertently. Just do a wardrive and discover how many routers out there are offering an open service with the SSID name LINKSYS. They`d hardly notice that they were connecting to the wrong router if yours was the same as theirs. For a while, if I connected wirelessly with my laptop from my bedroom, I`d inadvertently connect to my neighbour`s router and that was 250 feet away. My own router was only 70? away, but I got a better signal from my neighbour! After I secured my router and laptop to connect only to a specified service, I never connected to my neighbour`s service again!
This is where the Notice and Notice shot across the bow is a good system (compared with them coming after you) because it warns you that someone may be using your connection without your knowing it! Sometimes it takes very strong wording to get people looking at their situation.
Good luck in getting your router and system secured to ensure this doesn`t happen again. As to the Notice and Notice letters, I`d just ignore them.
76-year-old mother
Yesterday, Wayne and I were talking about his predicament and he once again swore he’s never downloaded anything, also declaring he’s never shared files with anyone, either.
And I believe him.
However, his 76-year-old mother had a laptop for Christmas and Wayne has been showing her how to use it and to get it going, a couple of weeks ago he bought a D-Link router.
Is it wireless? – I asked him.
There was a silence and then, “Um … it has little rabbit ears.”
So Yup. It’s a WiFi router.
“It’s the first time I’ve ever used a router, let alone explained to her how to use a lap top, or the direction the bunny ears have to be set up,” he said.
Was the router secured?
There was a silence and then, “Um, Nope.”
‘ … sharing a feature film via Bit Torrent’
I had an email from Jim Graham at BayTSP asking me to make it clear his company isn’t citing Wayne for a YouTube video.
“Based on the initial version of the story which included the Notice ID number (which was subsequently deleted), the notice relates to an individual downloading and sharing a feature film via Bit Torrent,” he said. “It did not relate to anything posted on YouTube. The complete version of the notice, which I reviewed, includes additional information, including the name of the film and the network protocol.”
BitTorrent, eh?
That was the first mention of the protocol supposedly used to download the still unidentified Lionsgate film or films.
Anyway, “Sure I’ll do an update,” I said, going on »»»
But since we’re talking, you say the notice relates to someone downloading and sharing a feature film via BitTorrent, but Wayne tells me me he’s never downloaded, or shared, a film, and I have no reason to disbelieve him.
You say the complete version of the notice (which I haven’t seen, and I don’t think Wayne has either) includes additional information, “including the name of the film and the protocol” which you say is BitTorrent.
But the emails I saw don’t name either.
I’d be grateful if you’d tell me:
- How the supposed evidence against Wayne was gathered;
- The name of the movie;
- When it was supposed to have been downloaded; and,
- What you plan to do next.
Unfortunately, Jim wasn’t able to enlighten Wayne or I further and although we now know BitTorrent was the protocol, we still have no clue as to which Lionsgate film, or films, Wayne is supposed to have grabbed.
In another email, “Is that ‘no comment’ to the questions I asked, including the name of the film?” – I said, going on:
“OK, how about a general question: What’s your normal procedure when you believe you’ve identified Canadians such as Wayne who are accused of downloading films owned by your clients, but who deny having done so?”
The procedure, “varies by client,” Jim responded, adding:
“In regard to the initial question, I said the version of the takedown notice published in the story appears to have been truncated. The information in the complete version would answer most of your questions. Unfortunately, I can’t send it to you.”
Pity.
Did Wayne truncate it? He says he didn’t, and I certainly didn’t.
“My reason for contacting you was to clarify that the notice did not relate to the video included in the story,” adds Jim.
Done, and happy to oblige.
In a Reader’s Write, Wayne says:
“I`m going to hang on to letter and ignore it, even though it`s a falsified hose job.”
And he wonders why nobody has “collectively filed a class action suit”.
Good question.
Meanwhile, “Two things … call into question the process by which BayTSP and other companies identify copyright infringers on BitTorrent and other p2p networks,” says Jeff in a Reader’s Write, adding:
1.) The recent study by the University of Washington that showed these companies` investigation methods to be inaccurate at best:
http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/06/05/the-inexact-science-behind-dmca-takedown-notices/and
2.) The Pirate Bay, the largest of all the BitTorrent trackers is using fake peers to throw off anti-piracy companies like BayTSP:
http://torrentfreak.com/the-pirate-bay-tricks-anti-pirates-with-fake-peers-081020/
Stay tuned.
Jon Newton – p2pnet
January , 2009
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.
January 30th, 2009 at 1:23 pm
Well first I have to give “Jim Graham at BayTSP” some credit for even speaking, even though he didn’t say much. So Jim, dialog is good. Its something people don’t get a lot of the times.
However, I still think there is a very big issue here.
Wayne, two-thumbs up to you. Many people would take it, get upset, and just forget about it.
I Nominate this article and the previous article on this topic to be stickied at the top of this website for the week.
I hope Dr. Geist’s site picks it up.
January 30th, 2009 at 1:36 pm
and on what “sb” spoke of is the truth in what is going on… This is the way its been working here Jon, for a long time now. Wayne is not the first to state he was wronged. I think some (or most) of what sb said can even be found on Dr. Geist’s site.
But this is the first time I see the issue pushed and a dialog opened. I like dialog. But who trusts an US sue-em-all machine? I wouldn’t. It would scare me off if a dialog was opened. But that’s the case of all these things. People get scared off….
January 30th, 2009 at 2:05 pm
“I Nominate this article and the previous article on this topic to be stickied at the top of this website for the week.”
As per your suggestion, I’ve put this one at the top.
Cheers!
January 30th, 2009 at 3:16 pm
heh, maybe the RIAA will contact Rogers and tell them to send a notice to this guy because he makes guitars that’s a tool for copyright infringement.
Sued for making available a means to make tunes! :p
I mean whats the difference here?
January 30th, 2009 at 4:11 pm
The Bay STP notice in itself (once itâs responded to) is a signed, sealed and delivered admission of guilt that can be used in a court of law thatâs not wavered nor retractable once itâs filed into discovery.
When a journey person in tool and die builds jigs and molds under patents, the employee signs an agreement with the employer not to disclose company secrets until he gets laid and sets up a business. The probability is Rogers would have to buy my molds and jigs and tool maker that made them with out using the tools of entrapment.
February 1st, 2009 at 8:55 am
Hey Jon, would you like the number to the Rogers Media Representitive? Get a quote just for p2pnet? if so, give me an e-mail.
February 2nd, 2009 at 7:15 pm
You know, there was a university trial during the at the time newest movie of Indiana Jones, where the ip was spoofed in the client. The ips were for a printer and for a wireless hotspot. They recieved a record number of cease and desist notices over it. The college newspaper ran a story of “Wanted” for a printer last seen downloading.
The point of this was there were monitors, setting in the flow stream, looking for IPs to harvest for reporting. There were obviously no checks on those ips if they were actually downloading. It appears it was assumed that if they were in the stream then they were guilty of downloading.
Say what you will about unsecured wireless routers and it being the responsibility of the owner to secure, I gotta tell you I got one and I don’t understand how you set it up to secure it. I’ve read the manual and help screens that come with it but you got to near have an IT background to understand all the computereze that is thrown in there with the expectation you know what they are talking about. Router makers don’t make them to my knowledge with wizards that do it for you. No, you got to manually do it on your own.
This is just like copyright legalize in this sense. If it takes lawyers that work in copyright, say 4 years to become a lawyer and an additional 2 to 3 years to learn copyright laws, you think the average citizen understands it, despite of the court assumption that ignorance is no excuse? I beg to differ and say it is the courts scapegoat, not reality.
It’s the same with securing a wireless router. It is evidenced first by the apparent “no clue” by Mr. Nagy of securing a router. I would be willing to bet at the time of contact he had no idea there is even a setup page for the router. That part is usually done by wizard for those of us clueless in how to network. ISPs do not make any sort of noise over securing a router when they take your money for an internet connection. Where else are you going to learn about the need if you don’t know already?
Most likely you are going to learn as Mr. Nagy did, you get an unfriendly letter.
February 5th, 2009 at 6:40 pm
Doesnt RIAA have any thing better to do than to harass “less fortunate people”??? This is my first post here, but seriously FUCK YOU RIAA!!!!!!!. I think the best way to get music is to visit the sites in Europe that sell music for 15 cents instead of 99 cents. Remember allofmp3, well there still mp3fiesta.cm, mp3sale.com, 8 cents at wermp3.com. Or torrents aren’t bad, the only way not to get caught with them is to use a proxy or a hacked modem -like me
-
February 12th, 2009 at 2:42 am
wonder what would happen if say your …ENCRYPTED everything you did that came to and from yoru computer.
What woudl htey do or say then OH your pirating and we hacked your computer and broke federal privacy laws to do it.
Oh and sorry we were wrong but hey we decided to smack you around anyhow.
O have proof of rogers a few years back illeally scanning my home pc 600 times in a 5 hour period , why cause i designed a custom firewall that obviously worked OR that the one they were telling you to use htey had a back door on, kinda like how SONY ROOT KIT got buy all the major anti virus and firewall makers .
MAkes ya wonder don’t it.
February 12th, 2009 at 2:46 am
OH and regarding the above printer ip spoof
heres a lil well kept secret for you all.
SOmetimes your devices like printers get static IP addrersses its one way to beat the bell canada constantly changing hte lease on a dynamic ip addrress. Well back a few years ago you could kinda hack into unprotected “devices” and as htey had some storage do some interesting htings. Of course that also lead to the hack into the main computer and wella you are pirated and it all comes back to a device IP.
NIce to say three strikes laws when hundreds a thousnads a computers are even fully patched are vulnerable.
Just enjoy the break form the net. in time hte rest of canada will join you and dont get a phone with them NOR a tv either , ya lets all stop using tv and cell phones and that is hte only way these idiots are gonna change
February 12th, 2009 at 2:51 am
OH AND YA NOTE THAT THIS IS OF COURSE BEFORE THE CDR LEVY SO IF YOU HAVE LEVIED CDRS SITTING ABOUT AND THEY TRY THIS SHIT SUE THEM, for the 300 million back in a class action lawsuit
THAT’S RIGHT THEY HAVE GOT 300 MILLION
if you DONT DOWNLOAD and need ot have storage get a god damn external hard drive ( OH just to teach you somehting any hard drive will do they aren;’t leviable and all you need is the 20$ USB connector and a plug)
if you have all htose thousands a nude pics a your wife and such well there ya go.
and dont give me the other crap either the sheer stupidity is funny.
Oh im a musician and we dont get our CUT
art is not about a cut its about sharing your art with people.
Stop trying to make money and instead be an artist.
Makes me wonder if any of these bands actualy play in a club or bar anywhere or are totaly made boy band girl band by hollywacked