This is How We Catch You Downloading
All over Europe thousands of people are being threatened with court action for allegedly sharing games like Dream Pinball 3D on P2P networks. Now, documents obtained by TorrentFreak show details of the anti-piracy company’s techniques for identifying alleged file-sharers on the internet and the gathering of claimed ‘forensic quality’ evidence for use in court cases.
In March we reported in some detail about the case of 500 UK file-sharers being legally pursued following claims that they uploaded games from the German publisher ‘Zuxxez’ onto file-sharing networks.
Since then, many people have been in touch with the law firm who sent the threatening letters, demanding evidence that they actually did something. TorrentFreak has obtained copies of the latest letters and within the claimed evidence is a description of how the anti-piracy system used by Logistep AG (the company hired to track the alleged pirates) is supposed to work.
The cleverly named “File Sharing Monitor” is the system being used by Logistep to gather evidence against file-sharers. It is actually just a modified version of the Shareaza P2P application that is configured to search for infringing files, and collect the information from the hosts that share these files.
The “File Sharing Monitor” only targets Gnutella and eDonkey users, so it is still unclear how they track down BitTorrent users. Here is how it works:
1. The client connects to the P2P network, searches for sources of the infringing file, and collects the IP addresses that were gathered through the search.
2. The client requests to download (a piece of) the file from the host that was found through the search.
3. The filename, file size, IP-address, P2P protocol, P2P application, time, and the username are automatically inserted into a database, if the host permits the download.
4. This is the “best” part. The application does a WHOIS search for the ISP information and automatically sends an infringement letter to the ISP if needed.
The claim is that the “File Sharing Monitor” is totally foolproof and that it can provide forensic-quality information to a court in order that file-sharers be punished. The question remains whether an IP-address is sufficient evidence to sue a person for downloading copyrighted material. Recent cases suggest that the RIAA and the MPAA will need more evidence than that.
Here is the ‘evidence’ for the functioning of the Logistep system. You decide.
-Link to PDF.
Previously: Automatically Transcode and Import Downloaded Videos to iTunes
Next: Do P2P Blocklists Keep you Safe?
142 Responses
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 » Show All
since the copyrightowner and agents working for them can’t infringe their own copyrights I of course have first bought the game legally in the shop, then downloaded the Rar archive for backup purposes only, and the most important part now:
I am NOT offering it for distribution to the public. The IP filter I use is of course set up in a way that it will only allow the IP adresses from copyright enforcers like those swiss morrons or their collegues in america.
And the stupid swiss morons have not only not setup their “Hit time” system to a worldwide standard of UTC for timereference, but they have not even provided any prove that their local clocks are synceonised on a continues basis with atomic based internet timeservers.
Their evidence is even more flawed than the RIAA ones where their expert got his “ass kicked” in his deposition end of february. MediaSentry at least allegedly downloads a few complete files from the IP address they allegedly have recorded. Those swiss morons just ask for hash values and do NOT download a whole file from only ONE source to show that he has in fact a genuine infringing file.
I bet some techgurus here can explain better then me that hashvalues are spoofable.
P.S. screwing up timezones is a well known problem of those “investigators”. They did it at first in the netherlands too*
So if you are a UK pinball fan and your ISP hadn’t had the same guts that the dutch ISP’s had and did indeed disclose to those lawyers your personal details, you can always play the “wrong timecode card” as defense.
Demand the sourcecode of the manipulated program they use, demand proof that their system clocks were accurately syncronised with a) the legal time b) that the clocks your ISP used in their logs was syncronised with legal time too, and that the different timezones were taken correctly in account while providing your private data to those lawoffice.
*
http://recordingindustryvspeople.blogspot.com/#Foundation_v_UPC_Nederland
I really don’t see how they can prove with any kind of certainty exactly what these people are sharing?
If they are just searching for filenames or comments, who’s to say the file offered is actually infringing, without downloading it and viewing it?
I could copy my windows swap file and share it with a name of and they’d probably still send a letter to my ISP?
Is IP evidence really that concrete considering the number of ISP’s that work on a dynamic instead of static IP system for their customers? Not to mention the ability of IP spoofing. It just sounds too flawed to be foolproof. Besides, anytime something is foolproof, a bigger fool evolves from the soup.
* with a name of “insert any recent popular movie name” that should’ve been…
I used to work for an ISP and deal with this sort of thing.
At any given time, only one account can have any given IP address, and it is all logged.
That said, the timezone stuff then becomes very important, as mentioned above, and an internet account isn’t the same as a person. Friends/family could be using it, some joker could be using your unsecured wifi, or your username/password could be being used by someone who installed some malware on your pc.
It’s not concrete in any way.
One suggestion is start preventing them from connecting at all, using an application like Peer Guardian.
If you think you can magically wash away some substantive legal case against you with a “wrong timecode card” then you’re delusional.
This program is the first step — then they subpoena your ISP — eventually they seize your computer and look at the logs (sure you erased everything? even .bash_history?)
Each phase of data gathering adds more weight to the case. Minor problems like timestamp inconsistencies would not be significant when considering the weight of evidence.
if your isp sends you a letter, tell them that your wireless router was open(no password)and your neighbor possibly downloaded it thru your connection. isp will tell you they are very sorry. if a company sends you a letter, better drag an huge magnet over your hd lol
but a question, if they are on P2P arent they downloading and uploading data ? if so then which isp are theirs so we can send them a letter instead.
What /everyone/ should start doing is leaving their wireless unsecured, then if/when they get a letter, just claim it was Mr. Nobody. :-D
anyone can do a WHOIS
[quote comment="85275"]
but a question, if they are on P2P arent they downloading and uploading data ? if so then which isp are theirs so we can send them a letter instead.[/quote]
They have permission from the copywrite holders to do it.
Stop using and sharing shitty 3rd rate corporate software. You’re just part of the problem. If people stop sharing this stuff nobody will buy it and the greedy bastards behind the lawsuits will go out of business.
Install Linux and enter a a new universe of millions and millions of legal free open source programs.
The blackout of the address somehow is visisible for a split second.
USENET ALREADY
#13
the software on the watchlist was a game.
games and linux…say no more.
but for the rest of your post i second it!
[quote comment="85301"]USENET ALREADY[/quote]
um…there’s no such thing as usenet.
I can’t stop laughing after reading this… y?? Cuz I usually hack into wireless networks around me, change my MAC address, turn off their router’s logging system and download whatever I like… not because I need all that but just to piss RIAA and MPAA… good luck catching me faggots!!
Well the file hash is rather unique and they would have to download and run the program to ensure that it is in fact the program of interest as a filename is rather meaningless. There are thousands of trojans out there that have interesting filenames and are the most available via p2p networks.
In Canada the downloading of copywritten files is not illegal but the “sharing” of same can be with the burden of proof is on the plaintiff.
With wireless networks abounding this proving is becoming increasingly difficult. They pretty much must seize your computer and then see if the file is actually in a ’shared’ folder for the file sharing software in question at the time of the incident. Just being in possession of the file on your hard drive is not sufficient evidence that you actually shared it. In other words they must have an active connection with your machine at the time of the incident. Just because they are in the queue isn’t proof since at that time you are not sharing the file it is just available for sharing.
The problem here is that these are civil and not criminal actions in which the rule of the ‘preponderance’ of the evidence is needed vice ‘reasonable doubt’.
A cease and desist letter is probably the best action by the copyright holders rather than these $18K+ orders.
No hashes or other verification the file is what it’s claimed to be?
So this “monitoring program” will add anyone with file in their share folder containing Dream Pinball 3D in it’s name? A few people could make it interesting for them and post a bunch of fakes on Gnutella and eDonkey, enough fakes would render their automated process useless or make litigation very expensive. It wouldn’t be hard to fill a file with junk until it the size matched.
i”ve always wonderd, how does sharing a useless piece of 1 rar file amount to copyright violation? Seriously, if you take that little bit you grabbed from whatever rar you downloaded off of, it’s completly useless. You cant extract it, you cant do crap with it. Now with bittorrent, when you upload your more likely to upload bits and pieces or several rars, but what you upload to one particular person amounts to nothing. Sure, when they put what you gave them together with what they get form others then they have a working rar that can be either extracted or played with, but your not resposible for what others upload, nor what the person recieving your uploaded info does with what he/she has gotten. I”ve always been curios why this approach hasnt been used in court as of yet. Mabey its a crap theory and I need to lay off the drugs, or perhaps my mind is far too advanced and I need to keep my drugs to help save mankind, heh - CJ
[quote comment="85313"][quote comment="85301"]USENET ALREADY[/quote]
um…there’s no such thing as usenet.[/quote]
You sure?
Aren’t there tools out there on the internet that are capable of changing your IP address ?! If they were to even catch “your” IP address, then U could easliy change it within seconds
As someone mentioned before, I can rename any of my PERSONAL files as “insert the software title here” dot exe.
How can they prove that I’m sharing THEIR software and not mine? They can’t. The ISP can’t. F**k them.
1 references to this post
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 » Show All
Responses are closed
All remaining responses will continue to be archived. Thanks to all who made serious comments.