Add real-time p2pnet headlines to YOUR site ! Click here to download our newsfeed code

5 Responses to “MediaSentry and Harry Potter”

1. Fausty | torrentfreedom.net Says:
   November 6th, 2009 at 5:23 pm

   We get these bullshit MediaSentry spambot email across a wide variety of jurisdictions – targeted at our VPN customers. Over the years, I’ve responded to hundreds of them on behalf of our company. Not once have we received so much as an automated spambot response, much less an actual human response… much less the threatened “legal action.”

   However, assuming that MediaSentry is being paid to actually bring lawsuits – or do much of anything beyond churn out the spambot emails – actually misses the actual manner in which they achieve censorship. You see, 99% of ISPs are either too lazy or too badly educated to recognize that the spambot emails are toothless wonders. So, the ISPs themselves – in order to “protect themselves from liability” – demand that their customers “do something” to address the putative “abuse.” If you tell your ISP, or hosting company, that you will “do” nothing based on an illegal spam email they will likely disable your account, cancel your hosting service, or unplug your server.

   So, MediaSentry does a great job of illegally conspiring to cause censorship via the lazy/dumb behavior of ISPs around the globe. By “sounding genuine,” these emails scare ISPs – they aren’t intended to actually scare end-users, nor to actually result in legal action. We’ve documented this process in hundreds and hundreds of these spambot emails, spread over several dozen various ISPs and hosting companies across a broad swath of legal jurisdictions.

   It’s worth nothing that, under the CAN-SPAM act in the USA, these kinds of automated, unsolicited emails are absolutely illegal. That’s “illegal” as in criminal – not the putative “illegal” that the media cartels always misrepresent non-commercial filesharing to be. The people who engage in these illegal unsolicited email programs are, by the letter of the law, supposed to be prosecuted by the federal criminal system and sent to federal prison if convicted. There are spammers sitting in federal prison in the USA, right now, who were prosecuted under CAN-SPAM; it’s not a newly-created law.

   However, that’s the letter of the law. In reality, for a criminal action to result in criminal sanctions in the USA an actual prosecutor must decide to take the case on. Without a prosecutor, there is NO criminal case – period. And, of course, prosecutors simply ignore cases that don’t “feel right” or aren’t politically viable or might upset some big-name political contributor. In that case, companies (and it’s usually companies) are able to flagrantly break the law – engage in criminal, often felony-level, behavior – and never risk the kinds of punishment any other American (or non-American, as the US is quite comfortable going after people outside the country, who have never set foot in the country, if they so choose) citizens will face if they break equivalent laws.

   So, at least in the USA, it’s possible to document with 100% accuracy that these MediaSentry spambot waves of unsolicited email are a criminal violation of a federal statute – but nobody will bring a case against the media cartels, so the behavior is unpunished and in fact continues to bring direct economic benefits to those involved in the conspiracy. Someone could, in theory, bring a class-action lawsuit against the cartels for this illegal behavior – in civil, not criminal, court – but to do so you’ll need several million dollars of cash, upfront, just to get the case off the ground. If it gets to an actual trial, and actual damages are awarded it’ll be at least a decade until a dollar actually gets paid – note that people are still waiting for damages to be paid by Exxon/Mobil for the Valdez spill.

   Oh, and MediaSentry’s actually not the worst of these spambots – there’s one operating out of the USA right now, demanding DIRECT payments to “settle claims of infringement” via credit card or PayPal. That’s illegal across so many US statutes it’s hard to keep count – bank fraud, wire fraud, CAN-SPAM, etc. Any attorneys involved with it are subject to disbarment for their assistance to an extra-legal conspiracy to defraud targets on the basis of putative legal claims. I’ve got a whitepaper about halfway-written on those operators, who owns them, who funds them, and who profits – just have to find the time to get it finished. Yes, we’ll forward that information to the prosecutors who SHOULD bring criminal charges, but don’t hold your breath. In the USA at least, there’s the law and then there’s “the law” – the latter being what applies to those with political connections and power, in which case most any crime can simply be ignored and will never be prosecuted. Think I’m overstating? Recall that Micro$oft was convicted of CRIMINAL antitrust violations, by a federal jury at a federal criminal trial. That’s a serious, felony-level criminal violation – involving billions of dollars of damages. According to federal sentencing guidelines, that’s the equivalent of centuries of prison time – for a person. For Micro$oft, they helped finance the installation of Baby Bush as president in 2000 and in return the case – and the sentencing of the defendant – was castrated by the new administration. Felony? So what – if nobody will implement sentencing then the “crime” becomes a joke, which is exactly what happened. How many people at Micro$oft went to prison for that felony criminal conspiracy? Right – zero.

   “All the justice you can afford” – that’s what I was taught by my parents, in terms of how things work in America. I grew up in a wealthy family, and at least our family is honest about the reality of the split system in place in this country. In the 20 years since I was taught those lessons by my parents, things have gotten far, far worse. Nowadays, those in power don’t even pretend to adhere to these silly “laws” – they just ignore them, and attack anyone who dares to suggest they are expected to do as the little people do and follow laws, let alone go to prison or anything. It’s a genuine disgrace.

   Fausty

2. Reader's Write Says:
   November 6th, 2009 at 11:34 pm

   WOW, the wording of your headlines is……………..imaginative!

3. G thompson Says:
   November 7th, 2009 at 1:58 am

   HI guys its the weekend here (Yeah for the weekend) and I’ll look into this on Monday and will also respond to the concerns of the TPG & other ISP clients in original post [note to self: remember to look months later for any replies in original p2pnet comments ]

   On first glance though it looks like normal C&D letters that are basic psychological harassment items (with no legal weight) and TPG et.al have done the old CYA (Cover Your Arse) thing and responded without probable cause (or even reasonable suspicion). We Actually have a Huge Case here at moment with AFACT v. iiNet that actually brings up all these issues with an ISP refusing to send C&D’s etc to clients since it allegedly breaches the Australian Telecommunications Act

   Write more later.

   Cheers G Thompson

4. Got the mail too :( Says:
   November 9th, 2009 at 5:41 am

   I just opened up my email to find the same thing today. What do you recommend I do?

5. Fausty Says:
   November 10th, 2009 at 3:17 am

   Here’s our most recent response to today’s round of spambot emails targeting our VPN customers. Naturally, our customers never actually see these extortion spam emails – they come to our network facilities, and we deal with them at the corporate level.

   —————————

   Dear Mr. “A. Kempe,”

   Since your name continues to be attached to these illegal spam extortion demands, I’m getting increasingly curious about just who you are. As I am sure you are aware – given your employer’s long history of failed business ventures and censure from legal authorities in a wide range of jurisdictions – trolling the internet looking for personal information, on behalf of a client, requires in most all states that your firm be licensed as a private investigator. Didn’t you already get smacked around by a court in Michigan for failing to carry the required licensing in that state?

   So, before we go further into our discussion about whether your automated extortion-bot emails are illegal per federal statute, let’s find out what your actual credentials are to be acting as a private investigator in the United States. Please provide signed, notarized copies of all relevant licensing in this regard to our office. Facsimile is fine: 877.909.9988 – or you may send via express delivery to your address at:

   Baneki Privacy Computing, Incorporated
   45905 Yale Road, Suite 456
   Chilliwack BC V2P 8E6
   Canada

   While you may feel, personally, that you are above the law and that having your name attached to a sea of illegal spam emails has no risk of personal legal liability – after all, your employer acts as a paid mercenary for media cartels with a great deal of paid-for political capital – we feel rather strongly that, in the United States at least, the law is applicable to ALL citizens. It is not intended, under that country’s founding documents and common law provisions, to merely be used as a tool to maximize profitability of a tiny segment of commercial enterprises. Yes, these laws actually apply to YOU, Mr. “Kempe.”

   In the meantime, rest assured that our company is – and has been – closely tracking you and your employer for quite some time. Unlike individual targets of your extortion campaigns, our company has the time and financial resources to respond to your illegal activities with all available tactics. In particular, we’re quite interested in the provisions available under civil law that allow individuals – and groups of individuals – victimized by illegal schemes to sue for not only compensatory retribution but also for punitive rewards. Perhaps you have some assets, personally, that can be used to help compensate the many targets of illegal extortion spam with your name on them.

   We do look forward to hearing from you, or whatever other paid lackeys see fit to step in on your behalf.

   Regards,

   D. Spink
   Chief Technology Officer

   ps: I’m fascinated by your statement that the hosting provider mentioned in your initial spambot message “owns” a specific IP address. Could you, perhaps, point me at some documentary explanation for exactly how a company comes to “own” an IP address? I must be misinformed, as it’s always been my understanding that IP addresses are, in point of fact, not “owned” by any one company. I am sure you can help to clarify my understanding.

   —–Original Message—–
   From: MediaSentryCopyrightInfringement [mailto:CBSCopyright@mc.mediasentry.com]
   Sent: Sunday, November 08, 2009 7:09 PM
   To: Network Center
   Subject: Case ID 973409150 – Notice of Claimed Infringement
   Sunday, November 08, 2009
   RE: Unauthorized Distribution of the Copyrighted Television Series Entitled Dexter

   Dear Network Center:

   We are writing this letter on behalf of Showtime Networks Inc. (”SNI”).

   We have received information that an individual has utilized the below-referenced IP address at the noted date and time to offer downloads of copyrighted television programs through a “peer-to-peer” service, including such title(s) as:

   CSI: Miami
   Dexter

   The distribution of unauthorized copies of copyrighted television programs constitutes copyright infringement under the Copyright Act, Title 17 United States Code Section 106(3). This conduct may also violate the laws of other countries, international law, and/or treaty obligations.

   Since you own this IP address (74.81.170.4), we request that you immediately do the following:

   1) Remove or disable access to the individual who has engaged in the conduct described above; and

   2) Take appropriate action against the account holder under your Abuse Policy/Terms of Service Agreement.

   We also would request that you inform the individual who engaged in this conduct that legitimate copies of SNI content are widely available for viewing online, for example on http://www.sho.com , as well as iTunes, Amazon.com and Movielink.com.

   On behalf of SNI, owner of the exclusive rights in the copyrighted material at issue in this notice, we hereby state that we have a good faith belief that use of the material in the manner complained of is not authorized by SNI, its respective agents, or the law.

   Also, we hereby state, under penalty of perjury, that the information in this notification is accurate and that we are authorized to act on behalf of the owner of the exclusive rights being infringed as set forth in this notification.

   Please direct any end user queries to the following: CopyrightQs@mediasentry.com

   Please include the Case ID 973409150, also noted above, in the subject line of all future correspondence regarding this matter.

   We appreciate your assistance and thank you for your cooperation in this matter. Your prompt response is requested.

   Respectfully,

   A Kempe
   Enforcement Coordinator
   MediaSentry

   > ——————————
   >
   > INFRINGEMENT DETAIL
   > Infringing Work: CSI: Miami
   > First Found: 8 Nov 2009 05:11:52 EST (GMT -0500) Last Found: 8 Nov 2009 05:11:52 EST (GMT -0500) IP Address: 74.81.170.4 IP Port: 32459
   > Protocol: BitTorrent
   > Torrent InfoHash: BA1B5FFFD39FA2C19FD333E8D61EF895F7CE2476
   > Containing file(s):
   > CSI.Miami.S08E05.Bad.Seed.HDTV.XviD-FQM.avi.torrent (366,642,048 bytes)
   >
   >
   > Infringing Work: Dexter
   > First Found: 4 Nov 2009 16:48:33 EST (GMT -0500) Last Found: 4 Nov 2009 16:48:33 EST (GMT -0500) IP Address: 74.81.170.4 IP Port: 37118
   > Protocol: BitTorrent
   > Torrent InfoHash: 896ABE02985AF8FA7E3893751BAA17EB4778E77A
   > Containing file(s):
   > Dexter.S04E06.720p.HDTV.X264-DIMENSION.mkv.torrent (1,564,901,918 bytes)
   >
   > Infringing Work: CSI: Miami
   > First Found: 8 Nov 2009 05:05:34 EST (GMT -0500) Last Found: 8 Nov 2009 05:05:34 EST (GMT -0500) IP Address: 74.81.170.4 IP Port: 32459
   > Protocol: BitTorrent
   > Torrent InfoHash: 9520F91D438BEDEE2AF71DD039965FDE311F21D0
   > Containing file(s):
   > CSI.Miami.S08E04.HDTV.XviD-LOL.avi.torrent (366,621,252 bytes)

Leave a Reply