That’s just the print on the side of the stamp letting you know what it stamps.

If you are that bothered about getting caught, do some googling, and go hack…

Morals… they wish!! HAHAHAHAHA

Another more realistic solution for torrenters in “dodgy” countries. Use leacher mods and don’t upload. I’d love to see “them” complaining to your isp when you havn’t shared a packet.

I sat through a lecture on computer forensics recently for school, given by the founder of TLSI (one of the leading computer forensics companies in the world, that handles casework for the FBI here in the states.) The way he described the situation, having your ip come up on one of these lists as pirating copyrighted material is probable cause to have the federal government search your house. And the way he said it would generally go down is that they would roll into your house like the swat team with guns drawn. They would “secure” you from access to your computer systems, and then image your hard drives. From there, they run a little program that identifies every piece of installed software on your computer system and its correspoding ULA. If you can’t produce a reciept or an install disc with a legal serial for every piece of software on your system (including your OS,) then they give you the option to purchase the software on the spot. If you don’t write them a check right then and there, then their case is pretty much made against you.

He also said any info on your hd is not completely gone until every bit has been overwritten at minimum, 7 times. They can also identify the pseudo-random algorithms used by every piece of commercial “shredding” and overwriting software on the market (until those overwritten bits have been overwritten themselves at least seven times by something else.) If they have enough evidence to bring a case against you, then the fact that you have used one of these programs can be used as evidence against you. And when used in conjunction with the doccuments supplied against you by your isp, even if they don’t find direct evidence of a crime on your computer, using one of those programs is almost enough to ensure a guilty verdict. So beware of file shredders.

He said that the “only” way to securly destroy the information on an hd and keep somone from gaining access to it, is by disassembling it and taking a ball peen hammer to every inch of the surface of the platters inside. Running magnets over them won’t do the trick.

He was saying that any time there is new technology about to be released to the public, they get it and figure out a repeatable process of reverse engineering it before it ever hits the streets, so it seems that if the gov’t really has a hard-on to bring you down, they most likely will.

And it’s not war, it’s a battle

If the RIAA and MPAA continue to push this ridiculous idea into the courts – they are going to be in for a much tougher battle then they think.. With the ability to shadow, clone, mesh, and use IP ‘blipping’ – the RIAA and MPAA are going to have a bunch of hackers pointing the IP addresses they are capturing back at them…

So , lets see – how the RIAA and MPAA are going to present a lawsuit on themselves, I mean after all – they cant be ‘prejudiced’ or ‘withhold’ information when they are throwing their weight around.. If their IPs are on the list, they are going to have to present the data unaltered , and in it’s original format.. So , I wonder what their plea will be then??

Face it – if they have enough balls to keep pushing the wrong buttons, things such as this are going to occur.. If the RIAA or MPAA came at me with such a thing – I would have to request them to provide proof that I personally initiated a ‘download’ to begin with, and if they are able to produce such evidence, then they will be facing a infringement of privacy lawsuit and an entrapment lawsuit to boot…

The RIAA and MPAA are not the CIA or FBI – and unless someone is committing acts against humanity or truly targetted for federal crimes – I doubt they are going to get the support they need to walk into millions of homes to prove their point… Of course, if they did start doing that – GOOD LUCK AT THE BOX OFFICES AND SELLING YOUR MUSIC – YOU WILL BE BOYCOTTED..

And it is the defendant’s job to prove, on the balance of probabilities, that he/she didn’t do what he/she is accused of.

Whoever provides the more convincing argument wins, simple as that.

This is a simple civil case, in the UK there is no general right to seize anyone’s property for evidence. The claimant has sue for actual losses only, but if they are successful they will probably recover their costs and some damages on top.

The timestamp argument is quite reasonable, but it doesn’t amount to what is known as a primary defence. The suggestion that someone else may have used your unsecured network is similarly useful, but there is again no guarantee that this will persuade the court without a lot of effort.

It seems a reasonable defence to argue that other people who had access to your pc or network may well have downloaded an incomplete – and therefore unusable- part of the infringing file, and this was subsequently and inadvertently made available.

Of course you could always argue that you bought a secondhand pc, or were repairing someone’s pc for them, or that your pc had been hacked and the settings changed without your knowledge, allowing files to be uploaded. Which, of course, you never do.

Ultimately it is down to whoever presents the more credible argument to the court, and in those cases in which I have been involved, they have all been withdrawn at the point of discovery.

I suspect the settlement figure of £300 has been pitched carefully to dissuade people that it’s easier to settle than to fight.

Because the device physically contains the code.

If I hadn’t been reading about how the game publisher ‘Zuxxez’ was suing their prospective customers (and also us who naturally want to have a backup of those games we buy), I would not be file sharing this game all the time.

I’m sure a lot of people that never heard of the game now wants to give it a try (simple publicity), but maybe they get it via bittorrent. But as usual, those who really like the game will probably also buy it.

Time will tell if Zuexxz strategy about how handle Dream Pinball 3D is correct or not.

Maybe off topic, but here’s another example of a game that I have bought, but despite the fact that I have a legit copy, I’m still using a file shared torrent copy: Toca Race Driver 3. The reason why I’m using a pirated copy is simple! The legal version i bought contains the copy protection scheme ‘Starforce’ (I saw that when I was about to install the game), and there is NO WAY I’m going to let the malware Starforce be installed in my computer! (google after ‘Starforce Problems’ for more info).

Thanks,
/T

I have one idea btw. I figured that they dont actually look for 0-sec releases so I just remove the old ones but keep the latest.

yeah, go and rent some ftp or storage server space located in china. Use a guttman 35 pass disk wipe on your existing drives. This will take about a week on a 40 gig drive. I get snort packet logs daily from infected ms-sql servers located in china, those look like perfectly good hosts if your into that sort of thing.

hehe

Now why does embedded device manufacturer have to release their modifications of GPLed code? Afterall, they are selling the device rather than distribute the modified GPLed code that runs on the device.

I got a warning from NBC via my ISP, saying I had downloaded/uploaded a TV series. Then I had 24 hours to go to a site they had setup where I had to put in my name and that I had deleted the content. As I had already watched it, I had no problems cleaning up my downloads folder.

So *they* are out there watching us… funnybunnies

-Piffer

Does the GPL require that source code of modified versions be posted to the public?
The GPL does not require you to release your modified version. You are free to make modifications and use them privately, without ever releasing them. This applies to organizations (including companies), too; an organization can make a modified version and use it internally without ever releasing it outside the organization.

But if you release the modified version to the public in some way, the GPL requires you to make the modified source code available to the program’s users, under the GPL.

Thus, the GPL gives permission to release the modified program in certain ways, and not in other ways; but the decision of whether to release it is up to you.

If I know someone has a copy of a GPL-covered program, can I demand he give me a copy?
No. The GPL gives him permission to make and redistribute copies of the program if he chooses to do so. He also has the right not to redistribute the program, if that is what he chooses.

http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html

Please help, people fighting this need every angle they can!

But the GPL derived code makes it illegal to sign a contract that prevents redistribution. They *must* own all the rights and thus can be subpoenaed for the code. If they have signed a contract that restricts release of source then the Shareaza author gets to sue whichever code shop actually did the coding.

If they did it themselves, then naturally they can choose to release the code or be compelled to do so by the court.

The open wireless router issue is more difficult to disprove, and the issue of discovery becomes impossible as the cynical defendant may give up the hard disk of the machine that they don’t download on for discovery. You *certainly* can’t identify the machine from behind the router.

sure you can ask them for the source, but they will not give it to you.

and since they do not distribute their modification to the pirating public for “peer review” they have every right to refuse.

This is how it works.
https://tor.eff.org/overview.html.en

Roger and Nick are really smart guys they sort out small issues very fast and reliably for they care a great deal about privacy on the net.

Tor only got 1 major issue and that’s available bandwidth say ‘tor exit nodes’. There are lots and lots of those however I think it should be popular amongst normal users to run such a node, be it an exit node or an internal node. So in the end we should have much more bandwidth available so this thing sort of gets democratized and we can actually help each other in a way that is convenient for us.

So try it for the things you thin should be private.

…and by the way of you run a Tor exit node you actually have proof that other people who you *cannot* know will use your internet connection. So you *cannot* be hold liable for anything that happens through your i-net link, unless of course there is trace that you actually did it on *your* computer.

Of course it’s the 21th century clever people can easily have their discs encrypted.

http://www.truecrypt.org/

http://www.google.com/search?q=netbsd+cgd

(tor by default does not log anything that could be used against you)