Printable View
Any proxy server on the internet can do this for you. They are free, just do a search on google. However there is no hiding your IP from your provider, since they assign it to you. They are required to maintain logs of their IPs for many different reasons, so at any time, they could match a given IP with the user who has it.
This is true ... but it's also true that merely connecting to a file-sharing service is not proof you're sharing something illegal. That's partly why Grokster/Streamcast prevailed in the recent court case -- because the judge cited the Supreme Court ruling of Columbia V. Sony, "...substantial non-infringing uses." If someone uploading a file from you cannot ascertain your IP number, how can they ascertain who your provider is? And without knowing who your provider is, who do they complain to?Quote:
Any proxy server on the internet can do this for you. They are free, just do a search on google. However there is no hiding your IP from your provider, since they assign it to you. They are required to maintain logs of their IPs for many different reasons, so at any time, they could match a given IP with the user who has it.
You've hit the nail on the head, and this is a flaw in the design element of kazaa. As the RIAA/MPAA grows more powerful, and they will, encryption and proxy servers will be the key to survival of p2p. Essentially, a new service, similar to kazaa will hit the market, and it will use public proxy servers as "go-betweens" so that file sharers won't be able to see each others IP addresses.Quote:
Originally posted by OlderThanDirt@4 May 2003 - 21:08
If someone uploading a file from you cannot ascertain your IP number, how can they ascertain who your provider is? And without knowing who your provider is, who do they complain to?
Its a game of tug of war, today we win, tomorrow, they do. B)
This is why I'm wondering whether Filetopia is privy to the current "solution" (which, tomorrow, may not be). Still, the real scary prospect isn't the technology aspect. As the Microsoft antitrust case has proven, our current administration isn't concerned that much with monopoly business practices. Therein lies the REAL danger. Imagine this nightmare scenario.
The top-5 music-cd cartel, together, is a multi-national conglomerate worth billions of dollars. What would happen if each member of this cartel decided to (ahem) diversify ... with each of them buying up the current broadband communications entities (Verizon, Covad, Comcast, etc., etc.). Then you'd have a situation where all the broadband ISPs are "owned" by the music police ... who would check EVERY connection to ANY file-sharing service and prosecute ANYONE who crossed the line they've drawn in the sand.
Given the debt load that many of the large telecommunications companies are burdened with I really don't see anyone jumping in to buy them.
Oh they are, however the technology is there, but to unroll a new platform, that's not so easy. Sharman Networks (those who created the original Kazaa) invested millions. So its easy for me to point us all in the next logical direction. However it takes capital and demand for that business venture to become a reality. :)Quote:
Originally posted by OlderThanDirt@4 May 2003 - 22:09
This is why I'm wondering whether Filetopia is privy to the current "solution" (which, tomorrow, may not be).
Yet ...Quote:
Given the debt load that many of the large telecommunications companies are burdened with I really don't see anyone jumping in to buy them.
But, there may come a time when the vast sums of money the media cartel "claims" to be losing supercedes worries over these debt loads ... convincing them to take such a plunge. And if they did, the current administration would tell the antitrust division of the Department of Justice to give it a wink and a nod.
The war on terror is so vague, so they'll find a way to associate filesharing with terrorism. It appears this is the cloud the government is hiding under for most of their atrocities now.
You apparently attribute greater longevity to the current administration than I.Quote:
Originally posted by OlderThanDirt@4 May 2003 - 20:26
And if they did, the current administration would tell the antitrust division of the Department of Justice to give it a wink and a nod.
Are you suggesting another democrat will make it to the oval office? :blink:Quote:
Originally posted by clocker@4 May 2003 - 22:42
You apparently attribute greater longevity to the current administration than I.