I completely agree that innovation always outpaces legislation. The internet community truly is a hydra.
I also agree that it would really surprise me if Mega honors the DMCA anymore after what the DOJ has done to them.
I suppose we'll have to wait and see how it's all setup, but I'll be really interested to see how the node volunteer program works. My guess is that there will be many Americans that may want to support Mega, and I would have to assume that the DOJ/MAFIAA will be be attempting to take action against them no matter what laws they have to stretch or skirt around after the total failure their case against Dotcom has become.
I'd assume that if nothing is ever passed on to the node volunteers directly (by this I mean notification of infringement) then the encryption gives them complete deniability of any knowledge of infringement. You also raise an interesting point about the potential, or lack there of, for obtaining records on node volunteers. I'd also be interested to see if the program works anonymously or through a VPN service... I guess we'll find out soon enough.
With the local encryption done by the original uploader prior to sharing the file, and node volunteer should have a fully legitimate defense that they could not have known the content of the stored files. What I'm wondering about is how DMCA takedowns will be handled (if Mega will be honoring them going forward). Will takedowns be done centrally through MEGA or will they be passed on to the node volunteer? And if they are passed on, what is the node volunteers liability for failure to act?
I believe the main purpose of the encryption is to provide Mega with plausible deniabilty in being able to say beyond a shadow of a doubt that they were unaware of whatever the stored content contains. Encryption for the user is just a secondary benefit. My understanding from the Ars review is that the encryption key can be generated within or separately from the download link, but it didn't mention if you can generate user specific decryption keys.
Wow... What an interesting reality you must live in!
Cooperating with the government on that request doesn't change the fact that the infringing material was there before the gov requested it stay. Along with untold other examples.
Megaupload did not know the files were there until they were informed by the DOJ (via Carpathia) that the files existed on their servers and were in fact infringing. Megaupload did not put the files there, one of their customers did. Now if the rightsholders had informed MU that those files were infringing and requested them removed through a valid DMCA notice, MU's track record on compliance is well established, and they would have removed them.
This. Is. Not. What. Happened.
The DOJ identified the files as infringing, informed MU of their existence, and then told them (read this next part carefully) NOT TO REMOVE THEM OR TAKE ANY FURTHER ACTION!!!
Are you actually trying to argue that MU should be held liable as a 3rd party service provider for the actions of it's users that they were unaware of? Again, it must be a very interesting reality you live in... If you have the time please post directions on how to get there so the rest of us can avoid it.
Whether or not pornography is actually covered under copyright is actually up for debate. An individual being sued by one of these copyright trolls is attempting to test this theory in court: https://torrentfreak.com/can-porn-be-copyrighted-120817/ The basic argument is that pornography does not promote the sciences or useful arts.
Ultraviolet will make you want to take the DVD case and repeatedly hit yourself in the head with it until one of you breaks. In the event that the DVD case breaks first, you will then find the closest substitute and continue bludgeoning your skull. It's. That. Terrible! That being said, I feel your pain. It's amazing that you could buy something in your country of residence that you can't use in your country of residence.
Also, +1 Interwebz for playing Duke Nukem 3D. I can't remember how much time I wasted playing pool on the billiards table in the pixelated strip club shooting the balls until I ran them out. "It's time to kick ass and chew bubble gum... and I'm all outta gum."
I don't know if you are just trolling, being willfully dishonest, or are just stupid (although it could be a combination of one or more), but the term monopoly is being properly applied to a copyrighted work.
Let's use your own example... Apple does have a monopoly on iphones, but you are correct in that you can get a similar experience in that you can make calls, send texts, download apps, etc on a Samsung phone or a myriad of others. The Samsung phone is an alternative to an iphone in that it provides you with a product that is functionally similar. If you want an iphone though you have to buy it from Apple, and if you buy a counterfeit then Apple has a right to stop the fake iphones production.
This is not the same situation when referring to a movie, or album, or other copyrighted work. If I want to watch Star Wars Episode 4 there is no legal alternative to obtaining the film other than going through a licensed distributor which is authorized by the copyright holder. Watching Star Trek part 4 could take up close to the same amount of time, and it is also a movie, but it is by no means a substitute for the Star Wars film. It's a completely different experience and in no way is described by your phone analogy.
When the library purchases the CD they do in fact purchase a licensed copy, but they are then free to do anything with that copy except copy it. They can listen to it, rip it to their mp3 player, use it for a beer coaster, sell it at a yard sale, or let their friend borrow it (etc...). None of these things are prohibited (or able to be prohibited) by the license granted for copy and private ownership.
It seems you are confusing a licensed physical copy with the rights granted by licensed digital copy. Once I have a licensed physical copy, I own that copy and can do anything I want with it except copy it. A licensed digital copy is different. That may impose restrictions on the transfer of that license which would restrict me from lending it or selling it (although this is something that will be addressed soon through the court system).
The copyright owner currently does not have this right to withhold this permission under US law. If a library legally purchases a book, cd, or dvd the copyright owner cannot stop the library from doing whatever they wish with it other than actually copying the media. Renting, selling, and lending the media are completely within the library's rights under the first sale doctrine. This may change with media created outside the country under the pending Kirstaeng case, but domestically produced media will not be affected.
Do you by any chance have any statistics on how many of the gun deaths in America were the result of guns legally owned and registered by people who were complying with current gun laws as opposed to those illegally acquiring guns? Gun control laws only work on those who follow the laws...
Perhaps we should send the execs for all of the US ISP's down to Australia and let them talk about this down under for a bit. My guess is that level headed thinking like this stems from the increased blood flow to the head from being upside down...
Cheers to iiNet! It's refreshing to see a provider push back against the propaganda and so blatantly call them out on their own failures to service their customers. If you ever decide to expand to the states I will absolutely throw my money at you!
Re: No, Mike, it's only time to patch up the holes pirates are making.
No matter how many times you use those words, they still don't mean what you think they do.
Origin of "shiver me timbers"... Pretty sure that's something Dark Helmet said at the last in_to_the_coo family reunion to your mom... or was it your sister? It was hard to hear over the sounds of your frantic typing on your extra clicky keyboard as you vomited forth another lobotomy induced internet rant.
On the post: Six Strikes Administrator: Loss Of Open WiFi Access At Cafes Is Acceptable Collateral Damage
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: No, Kim Dotcom's New Mega Service Does Not 'Dismantle Copyright Forever'
Re: Re: Re: Nodes?
I also agree that it would really surprise me if Mega honors the DMCA anymore after what the DOJ has done to them.
I suppose we'll have to wait and see how it's all setup, but I'll be really interested to see how the node volunteer program works. My guess is that there will be many Americans that may want to support Mega, and I would have to assume that the DOJ/MAFIAA will be be attempting to take action against them no matter what laws they have to stretch or skirt around after the total failure their case against Dotcom has become.
I'd assume that if nothing is ever passed on to the node volunteers directly (by this I mean notification of infringement) then the encryption gives them complete deniability of any knowledge of infringement. You also raise an interesting point about the potential, or lack there of, for obtaining records on node volunteers. I'd also be interested to see if the program works anonymously or through a VPN service... I guess we'll find out soon enough.
On the post: No, Kim Dotcom's New Mega Service Does Not 'Dismantle Copyright Forever'
Re: Nodes?
On the post: No, Kim Dotcom's New Mega Service Does Not 'Dismantle Copyright Forever'
Re:
On the post: Yes, You've Got Something To Hide
Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Sony Issues The 'Bob Dylan Copyright Collection Volume' Solely To Extend Copyright On Dylan's Work
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
-Grumpy old fist waving man sense of entitlement - Check
-No actual argument so resorts to vague statements and ad homs - Check
-Finds a way to look more ridiculous by opening his mouth than dressing up in a homo-erotic devil costume - Check
I'd say he's 97.6% probably Gene Simmons
On the post: Dad Hires Digital Assassins To Murder His Son (Digitally)
On the post: Megaupload Tells Court That DOJ Deliberately Misled Court In Getting Warrant
Re: Re: Responsibility
Cooperating with the government on that request doesn't change the fact that the infringing material was there before the gov requested it stay. Along with untold other examples.
Megaupload did not know the files were there until they were informed by the DOJ (via Carpathia) that the files existed on their servers and were in fact infringing. Megaupload did not put the files there, one of their customers did. Now if the rightsholders had informed MU that those files were infringing and requested them removed through a valid DMCA notice, MU's track record on compliance is well established, and they would have removed them.
This. Is. Not. What. Happened.
The DOJ identified the files as infringing, informed MU of their existence, and then told them (read this next part carefully) NOT TO REMOVE THEM OR TAKE ANY FURTHER ACTION!!!
Are you actually trying to argue that MU should be held liable as a 3rd party service provider for the actions of it's users that they were unaware of? Again, it must be a very interesting reality you live in... If you have the time please post directions on how to get there so the rest of us can avoid it.
On the post: Prenda Lawyer Claims Judge 'Abhors' Copyright Holders After Judge Becomes Curious About Who Alan Cooper Really Is
Re: Re: Re: Re: Porn copyright
No matter how many times I read the constitutional line on the purpose of copyright, I simply can't find a euphemism in there to exploit for this.
So, that's what she said!
On the post: Prenda Lawyer Claims Judge 'Abhors' Copyright Holders After Judge Becomes Curious About Who Alan Cooper Really Is
Re: Re: Porn copyright
On the post: Innovation, Optimism And Opportunity: All Coming Together To Make Real Change
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Also, +1 Interwebz for playing Duke Nukem 3D. I can't remember how much time I wasted playing pool on the billiards table in the pixelated strip club shooting the balls until I ran them out. "It's time to kick ass and chew bubble gum... and I'm all outta gum."
On the post: Innovation, Optimism And Opportunity: All Coming Together To Make Real Change
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Let's use your own example... Apple does have a monopoly on iphones, but you are correct in that you can get a similar experience in that you can make calls, send texts, download apps, etc on a Samsung phone or a myriad of others. The Samsung phone is an alternative to an iphone in that it provides you with a product that is functionally similar. If you want an iphone though you have to buy it from Apple, and if you buy a counterfeit then Apple has a right to stop the fake iphones production.
This is not the same situation when referring to a movie, or album, or other copyrighted work. If I want to watch Star Wars Episode 4 there is no legal alternative to obtaining the film other than going through a licensed distributor which is authorized by the copyright holder. Watching Star Trek part 4 could take up close to the same amount of time, and it is also a movie, but it is by no means a substitute for the Star Wars film. It's a completely different experience and in no way is described by your phone analogy.
On the post: Copyfraud: Copyright Claims On CDs Say It's Infringement To Loan Your CD To A Friend
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: LENDING: clarification
It seems you are confusing a licensed physical copy with the rights granted by licensed digital copy. Once I have a licensed physical copy, I own that copy and can do anything I want with it except copy it. A licensed digital copy is different. That may impose restrictions on the transfer of that license which would restrict me from lending it or selling it (although this is something that will be addressed soon through the court system).
On the post: Copyfraud: Copyright Claims On CDs Say It's Infringement To Loan Your CD To A Friend
Re: Re: Re: LENDING: clarification
On the post: Will The RIAA Need To Start Worrying About 3D Printed Records Next?
Re:
On the post: You Only Live Once, So Why Not Demand Payment For The YOLO Acronym You Didn't Invent?
Re:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drake_Mallard#Cast_and_characters
He's a superhero from a nineties Disney cartoon kind of like Batman but funnier and with more Launchpad McQuack.
/amidoinrite?
On the post: Hollywood Studio IP Addresses Sharing Hollywood Movies Via BitTorrent
Re: Re:
Revel in the delicious irony!
On the post: NRA's Plan: If We Blame Video Games & Movies For Sandy Hook Massacre, Perhaps People Will Stop Blaming Guns
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: LOL WOT ?
On the post: Aussie ISP: We Won't Be Hollywood's Copyright Cops If Hollywood Won't Fix Its Own Business Model
Hmmmm...
Cheers to iiNet! It's refreshing to see a provider push back against the propaganda and so blatantly call them out on their own failures to service their customers. If you ever decide to expand to the states I will absolutely throw my money at you!
On the post: Let Congress Know That Now Is The Time To Fix Copyright, Not To Put Their Head In The Sand
Re: No, Mike, it's only time to patch up the holes pirates are making.
Origin of "shiver me timbers"... Pretty sure that's something Dark Helmet said at the last in_to_the_coo family reunion to your mom... or was it your sister? It was hard to hear over the sounds of your frantic typing on your extra clicky keyboard as you vomited forth another lobotomy induced internet rant.
Next >>