-
Giganews DMCA Rampage: Embrace 100% data loss.
Well, i guess some of the members from the copyright mafia ring did learn something about usenet :D
At least the ones that demand taking down certain xbox 360 games.
For the fun of it i tested several games posted not so long( ~27+ days) ago via supernews and , oh boy, was i surprised...
Totally wiped out data. 261/261 blocks not found per each file.(for instance)
So, if you like console games and think that block account will save you, then you are in for a nasty surprise. Well, it will fill those blocks but it will also expire soon..
Of course in most cases you can still find untouched releases of these games at least for now but hey, it still does hurt my big usenet loving tender heart :lol:
PSA its kinda funny to read them braggig on the official site about 100% completion. Yeah, you heard it right. 100%. Not even 99% as most other usenet providers advertise. rofl
-
Re: Giganews DMCA Rampage: Embrace 100% data loss.
The 'game' publishers are much more 'up to snuff' on DMCA 'takedowns' and such than the movie folks. Then again, it's just as easy to use a rental service (even more so) and 'rip yer own', you just have to be on the cutting edge a bit more to produce the 'copy'.
-
Re: Giganews DMCA Rampage: Embrace 100% data loss.
CloneDVD + AnyDVD + Netflix = pure bliss :) I'm sure with SOPA they will try to block access to Anydvd's website, so I'll have to try to get updates off IRC or newsgroups.
-
Re: Giganews DMCA Rampage: Embrace 100% data loss.
I kind of prefer the takedowns to be the entire file, rather than just 10% or so. No wasted server space or download bandwidth, and no nasty surprises at the end of the download.
I wonder if Giganews claims 100% completion on all those files that were not uploaded properly? Apparently it's defined as 100% completion on what they actually have rather than on what they should have
Although it was usually a fun project, I found it could be a lot of work putting together a 100% working game copy. And this was back in the pre-p2p dialup era -- but now it's so much quicker and easier to get something off the internet than to try to rip/copy your own, I've got to wonder why people would even bother.
-
Re: Giganews DMCA Rampage: Embrace 100% data loss.
If you're going to pay for newsgroup access, why not pay for a seedbox or VPN ? They will give you an equivalent level of anonymity and a whole load of options on how to where and how to download.
-
Re: Giganews DMCA Rampage: Embrace 100% data loss.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
temisturk
why not pay for a seedbox or VPN ? They will give you an equivalent level of anonymity
Many VPNs are not the least bit anonymous -- and presumably some seedbox companies as well.
Code:
http://torrentfreak.com/which-vpn-providers-really-take-anonymity-seriously-111007/
And it's worth pointing out that even companies that promised absolute anonymity have been quick to rat-out customers as soon as the law came knocking.
-
Re: Giganews DMCA Rampage: Embrace 100% data loss.
I didn't say all VPN's and seedboxes guaranteed anonymous. This is the Internet--you do need to use at least some common sense.
But consider that just as you only have the word of a VPN company that it won't log your activities or reveal them to law enforcement agencies you only have the word of a Usenet company that it won't do likewise.
Also, if you want to play at TorrentFreak quoting, read this: http://torrentfreak.com/giganews-law...wnload-100520/
-
Re: Giganews DMCA Rampage: Embrace 100% data loss.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
temisturk
If you're going to pay for newsgroup access, why not pay for a seedbox or VPN ? They will give you an equivalent level of anonymity and a whole load of options on how to where and how to download.
One of the primary advantages of Usenet is not having to deal with all of the downsides of bittorrent culture, anonymity is just another bonus.
-
Re: Giganews DMCA Rampage: Embrace 100% data loss.
There are downsides (and upsides) to everything. I'm not saying that BT is superior to Usenet (nor that it is inferior). I'm just pointing out to someone who is experiencing some dissatisfaction with one form of filesharing that there are viable alternatives.
-
Re: Giganews DMCA Rampage: Embrace 100% data loss.
Sure, but I'm only pointing out the decision to pay a few bucks goes beyond anonymity and internet speed. I look at bittorrent culture as a horrible horrible plague, and only use these private sites to fill the gaps that usenet doesn't address, which right now includes some web.dl's and versions of movies I want to archive.
-
Re: Giganews DMCA Rampage: Embrace 100% data loss.
Should I try to defend "bittorrent culture"? I could take a shot but this is the newsgroups section so I'm not sure it would be appropriate to do so here? I just wanted to say there was a choice, which I've done, not to evangelise or try to troll newsgroupies. I need your unreliable guidance to know whether now would be a good time to stfu or not?
-
Re: Giganews DMCA Rampage: Embrace 100% data loss.
I'm trying to see how defending bittorrent culture would offend newsgroup users, but I just can't find the angle. Your arguments, depending on their nature, might offend the spirit of intellectual development so that's your chance to take.
By the way zot's a totally uninformed pussy, beck38 is probably wedged between 2 server stacks tired and hungry with no one responding to his cries of help, and hypatia is a plant from the MPAA here to spy on all of us and undermine some supposed movement.
-
Re: Giganews DMCA Rampage: Embrace 100% data loss.
I was just thinking about it being off-topic, some forums don't like that. And I got bitten by american idol for merely mentioning downloading in the movie section so I'm just being careful. Anyway, you're going to have to make a more specfic accusation than "bittorrent culture is a horrible horrible plague" if I'm to make a more specific defence than "no, it's not, it's a wonderful garden full of sunflowers."
-
Re: Giganews DMCA Rampage: Embrace 100% data loss.
So are there any usenet providers who are not succumbing to the takedowns at alt.binaries.xbox360?
I know for sure newsdemon is taking articles down.
-
Re: Giganews DMCA Rampage: Embrace 100% data loss.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
temisturk
I was just thinking about it being off-topic, some forums don't like that. And I got bitten by american idol for merely mentioning downloading in the movie section so I'm just being careful. Anyway, you're going to have to make a more specfic accusation than "bittorrent culture is a horrible horrible plague" if I'm to make a more specific defence than "no, it's not, it's a wonderful garden full of sunflowers."
You'll never catch idle in a mood where he isn't bitching about something or at least extremely annoyed. I'm surprised he hasn't hung himself. Personally, I enjoy the melancholy (and I'll ignore any of his attempts to define his mood). But no, I don't feel like going on an extremely long tirade about bt culture. Much of my ranting can be found during my 200th-700th posts probably (no idea because I can't check).
-
Re: Giganews DMCA Rampage: Embrace 100% data loss.
OK, we'll call it a draw then. :fst:
-
Re: Giganews DMCA Rampage: Embrace 100% data loss.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
lightshow
So are there any usenet providers who are not succumbing to the takedowns at alt.binaries.xbox360?
I know for sure newsdemon is taking articles down.
yes but it prolly isnt a good idea to advertise who has it all. dont need to do the work for the copyright a-holes.
-
Re: Giganews DMCA Rampage: Embrace 100% data loss.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
temisturk
OK, we'll call it a draw then. :fst:
I never draw, and I only lose if I decide to take a loss. This was me sparing you from a routing, and me sparing myself from irritable bowels.
-
Re: Giganews DMCA Rampage: Embrace 100% data loss.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
hdjunky
yes but it prolly isnt a good idea to advertise who has it all. dont need to do the work for the copyright a-holes.
I think it's fine to freely discuss this. The companies that issue the DCMA have full knowledge of all the major channels of which binaries of their stuff can be posted. Really the discussion on our side would be which providers stand up to DCMA requests and/or are able to drag their feet for a measurable amount of time.
-
Re: Giganews DMCA Rampage: Embrace 100% data loss.
Ah, that explains your avatar :lol:
-
Re: Giganews DMCA Rampage: Embrace 100% data loss.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
temisturk
But consider that just as you only have the word of a VPN company that it won't log your activities or reveal them to law enforcement agencies you only have the word of a Usenet company that it won't do likewise.
Although all usenet servers log posts(uploads) --mainly to fight spam-- it would be suicidal for any usenet company to log its customer's downloads, as that information would definitely be used against them in any lawsuit claiming that the company "profits from copyright infringement".
Download logs serve as the 'smoking gun' that would prove the company facilitates copyright infringement - destroying any possible hope of the company arguing in court that customers are probably just downloading freeware Linux CDs.
And if that logic was not self-evident to usenet providers, they can look at the example of Newsfeeds (usenet.com/newsgroups.com), a company which was stupid enough to collect download logs (and even stupider to get caught deleting those logs and pretending they never existed) and ended up being exterminated by a RIAA lawsuit -- no doubt due in part to the very existence of those damning download logs.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
lightshow
So are there any usenet providers who are not succumbing to the takedowns at alt.binaries.xbox360?
I know for sure newsdemon is taking articles down.
NewsDemon is a Highwinds reseller. Highwinds and Giganews are the primary ones getting hit with massive DMCA takedowns. Any other (back-end) provider should be a huge improvement.
-
Re: Giganews DMCA Rampage: Embrace 100% data loss.
Exactly. Logic is logic: it doesn't change depending on whether a company provides usenet access, seedboxes or vpn's. So we agree that seedboxes and vpn's are just as safe as usenet providers and that anyone who uses any services on the internet should check the reputation of any companies they want to do business with.
-
Re: Giganews DMCA Rampage: Embrace 100% data loss.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
temisturk
So we agree that seedboxes and vpn's are just as safe as usenet providers
No, we do not agree. I consider downloading from usenet much less risky than downloading on P2P/Bittorrent using a VPN or seedbox.
One main difference is that unlike Usenet, in P2P there is no such thing as a "passive downloader" - everyone is essentially an uploader (even if such uploading is disabled) whose IP address (whether actual or proxied) is publicly visible to everyone else connected to the network. A bittorrent swarm can easily be monitored, every download counted, and the IP address (traceable or not) of every downloader recorded by hostile forces. With IP address in hand, the copyright cops can then pressure a VPN operator to reveal the person behind this proxied IP address.
In contrast, no one knows how many people --if any-- downloaded a particular file posted to usenet. (Other than possibly a usenet provider itself, who has a heavy financial incentive "not to know" - for reasons I detailed in my last post)
This is the main reason why, in my opinion, the highly public action of downloading on Bittorrent behind a VPN should be considered inherently less safe/anonymous than the highly private action of downloading on usenet.
-
Re: Giganews DMCA Rampage: Embrace 100% data loss.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
zot
This is the main reason why, in my opinion, the highly public action of downloading on Bittorrent behind a VPN should be considered inherently less safe/anonymous than the highly private action of downloading on usenet.
Most cases brought out against anybody targets them for distribution of copyrighted material. That's where prosecution focuses since the damages that could be sought for "download only" infringement wouldn't be financially viable (except for the threatening letter scams). Being just a downloader would keep you relatively safer despite even the possibility of download logs. That's the only point I thought you were missing.
-
Re: Giganews DMCA Rampage: Embrace 100% data loss.
Of course, when the movie mafia gets caught with their hands in the cookie jar, they get to go 'judge shopping' to find someone to throw out the complaint against them.
http://torrentfreak.com/warner-bros-...quests-111109/
I have a legal case (fraud) that's been going on for over 30 years now, will never be settled as the state prosecutor that originally refused to allow the case to go forward is now the State Atty. General (R., running for governor), but the states arguments fall flat in every court but it keeps getting sent back to the lower court(s). They keep saying 'settle this out of court' but I want to see the people to a 'perp walk', period. They can't force me to withdraw the criminal complaint, and as long as it exists, it remains a thorn in the side of the criminals every time they try to 're-hatch' their plots.
There is only one thing that gets these thieves attention, whether it's bank fraud or anything else, and that's hard time in the 'big house'. Anything less is the 'cost of doing business'. See resent news on judges going after the banks, and the state/federal prosecutors refusing to indict. Same crap.
-
Re: Giganews DMCA Rampage: Embrace 100% data loss.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
zot
One main difference is that unlike Usenet, in P2P there is no such thing as a "passive downloader" - everyone is essentially an uploader (even if such uploading is disabled) whose IP address (whether actual or proxied) is publicly visible to everyone else connected to the network.
If you're using a VPN you are not publicly visible to everyone. Only the VPN company knows what you're doing. Just as only the Usenet company knows what you download from them. It is exactly the same. Your argument comes down to "Usenet companies won't sell out their customers because then they would have no customers but VPN companies will sell out their customers because...um...err...well...um...it's very sunny today isn't it?"
Quote:
Originally Posted by
zot
A bittorrent swarm can easily be monitored, every download counted, and the IP address (traceable or not) of every downloader recorded by hostile forces. With IP address in hand, the copyright cops can then pressure a VPN operator to reveal the person behind this proxied IP address.
Sure, in theory, but it's never happened and probably never will happen because it's far easier to catch people who haven't protected their identities and it's far far easier to spread rumours and try to scare people off filesharing period. But if you want to put up hypothetical extremes then it is possible hostile forces could pressure a Usenet operator to reveal their logs or the ISP of the Usenet operator to reveal their logs or your ISP to reveal their logs. I accept it isn't likely but, again, that's the same as in the case of them pressuring VPN's.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
zot
In contrast, no one knows how many people --if any-- downloaded a particular file posted to usenet. (Other than possibly a usenet provider itself, who has a heavy financial incentive "not to know" - for reasons I detailed in my last post)
You did. But you have conspicuously failed to explain why VPN providers don't have the same "heavy finanicial incentives".
Quote:
Originally Posted by
mjmacky
Most cases brought out against anybody targets them for distribution of copyrighted material.
I agree. But, firstly, almost all such cases have failed. And by "almost all" I mean that there have literally just a dozen odd convictions or judgements handed down against filesharers anywhere in the world, ever. There are lots of threats of criminal or civil prosecution. And lots and lots and lots of headlines. And lots of people who give in to the bullying tactics. But if you look through the smoke there is very very little fire.
Also, laws differ around the world and over time, and the tactics of the copyright cops change over time. I certainly agree that bittorrent is receiving more of their attention at the moment but that doesn't mean they're totally ignoring usenet or that they won't give it more attention in future.
-
Re: Giganews DMCA Rampage: Embrace 100% data loss.
I don't think usenet is invulnerable but I think it's unlikely we'll ever be in a position where a copyright holder can approach a usenet provider saying a copyrighted file was posted on your server, you must hand over your logs so we can see who downloaded it.
-
Re: Giganews DMCA Rampage: Embrace 100% data loss.
With Usenet, you can just download. How are they going to know what you are downloading especially if it is encrypted? They can't really without breaking the law. Uploading is the key here and when you are torrenting you are doing just that. Now instead of downloading copyrighted material, you are distributing it which is the bigger no no. That is what these file sharing cases focus on because frankly it is more financially viable and easier. Also if you upload to Usenet, you do it once. You aren't in some swarm of hundreds or thousands of other file sharers, which just adds to the damages if you get taken to court. To me, it is leaps and bounds better than torrenting, just my opinion. If you like torrenting, then stick with it. More power to ya...
-
Re: Giganews DMCA Rampage: Embrace 100% data loss.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
A_T
I don't think usenet is invulnerable
Yes! That's really the only point I'm trying to make. I don't think that VPN's are invulnerable either. I'm just talking about relative risk. And I'm saying that VPN's and Usenet are both relatively safe compared to downloading without any precautions at all.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
sandman_1
With Usenet, you can just download. How are they going to know what you are downloading especially if it is encrypted?
I'm sorry but first see my reply above and secondly try to see how your question applies equally to downloading via a VPN. They won't know what you're downloading or who you are unless they can force the Usenet or VPN company to tell them. And if they can force one company then they force another.
-
Re: Giganews DMCA Rampage: Embrace 100% data loss.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
temisturk
Quote:
Originally Posted by
zot
In contrast, no one knows how many people --if any-- downloaded a particular file posted to usenet. (Other than possibly a usenet provider itself, who has a heavy financial incentive "not to know" - for reasons I detailed in my last post)
You did. But
you have conspicuously failed to explain why VPN providers don't have the same "heavy finanicial incentives".
You're misinterpreting his point. With a torrent, they have your IP address, and if it belongs to a VPN service, they have a known target/source with which to identify you (communication logs aren't even necessary, it's very much similar to asking your ISP for user information based on IP address, which might come as a secondary step).
The case with Usenet is that logs aren't categorized with each post. Basically, to find out which IP grabbed a particular post, the entire logs would have to be searched that matches requests and downloads with a particular post ID. Basically they can't even get a single IP address without the legwork of the Usenet Service Provider. And ALL OF THAT hinges on the unlikely possibility that they've retained all their logs. You see how much further the gap is, and why this is not equivalent to VPN?
-
Re: Giganews DMCA Rampage: Embrace 100% data loss.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
mjmacky
You see how much further the gap is, and why this is not equivalent to VPN?
I thought everybody could figure that out easily. Except temisturk, apparently.
-
Re: Giganews DMCA Rampage: Embrace 100% data loss.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
KFlint
Quote:
Originally Posted by
mjmacky
You see how much further the gap is, and why this is not equivalent to VPN?
I thought everybody could figure that out easily. Except temisturk, apparently.
I think one has to learn it, so it would be especially foreign to someone who has never used usenet. I don't know his relationship with usenet, but he seems ready to debate about something; as good a time as any for a proper flogging.
-
Re: Giganews DMCA Rampage: Embrace 100% data loss.
I accept that they are not, technically, exactly the same. But that really isn't the point that I'm trying to make. What I'm saying is that if you pay money to a company on the internet to protect yourself from hostile eyes, you are making an assumption that the company will act in good faith now and in the future and that it will not buckle to any pressure. And I'm saying that pressure can be applied to any sort of company and that some of them will buckle. And I don't know why you all keep insisting that every VPN keeps detailed logs of everything that people download from them and hands them over to the copyright police at the drop of a hat and that no Usenet company anywhere in the world ever has or ever will log anything and they'll all literally blow up their computer rooms before they would ever turn anything over to anybody. Especially when usenet companies actually host copyrighted content on their servers and accept money from people to download it which is exactly what companies like megaupload do and they're coming under very heavy legal fire at the moment, far more than any vpn provider has (because vpn providers only provide a conduit so there is no grounds to sue them for anything).
-
Re: Giganews DMCA Rampage: Embrace 100% data loss.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
temisturk
And I don't know why you all keep insisting that every VPN keeps detailed logs of everything that people download from them and hands them over to the copyright police at the drop of a hat and that no Usenet company anywhere in the world ever has or ever will log anything and they'll all literally blow up their computer rooms before they would ever turn anything over to anybody.
Not at all what I any of us were saying. With torrenting, DMCA agents gather evidence against you, they only need the VPN to identify who you are (very much like that's the only information they would need from an ISP). With usenet, they come empty handed, a post ID. With usenet, the burden of collecting evidence on you relies completely on the USP's logs (which probably are only maintained for uploaded posts, and only with originating USP). So what I'm trying to point out to you, is that with usenet, there is absolutely no monitoring/investigation a DMCA agent could do without complete assistance from a USP (and only if they still have logged downloading information, which is wasted space at best). And to correct another misconception you're having, in no way am I implying that a VPN keeps a log of all your activity. A VPN's complicity only requires them to identify who the IP address belongs to, and it's just as easy to force them to give it up as it is for an Internet Service Provider.
-
Re: Giganews DMCA Rampage: Embrace 100% data loss.
OK, sorry, I didn't mean to be a rantygirl but your arguments are all so circular. Yes, there are ways in which copyright cops might gather evidence against a bittorrent user that they wouldn't be able to gather against a usenet user but that is obvious because the mechanisms are different. But there are also ways they could gather evidence against a Usenet provider which they couldn't gather against a VPN provider. They could pay money to the Usenet provider and download copyrighted content from them. They could then put the provider under pressure for hosting the content and if you can successfully prosecute someone then who knows what sort of deal they might be willing to come to. They could never gather that sort of evidence or use it against a VPN provider because VPN providers don't host content.
Or look at it another way. How come, when the copyright police make such a hoohah in the news when they close down a torrent site or steal a domain name or even "win" a case like Tenenbaum or Thomas they go to so much trouble to totally suppress any news of successful cases against VPN's? Because if you google, you won't find anyone anywhere in the world who have ever been prosecuted for downloading via a VPN. I haven't looked but I doubt you will find anyone who has ever been prosecuted for downloading from Usenet either. But that just points to the fact that both are pretty damn safe.
You guys are focussing on the trees and missing the forest, believing that you've found the ultimate solution to downloading in complete safety. But that's OK, I'm not saying or trying to convince anyone that bittorrent via a vpn is safer than usenet. And I'm not dissing Usenet. They are both good and safe and if you prefer one or the other then that is fine. If you were using LimeWire then that would be different as I would seriously worry for you but what you're choosing isn't a bad option. And remember I only posted here in the first place because someone wasn't happy with what the copyright police were doing to his Usenet downloading experience. Sheesh.
-
Re: Giganews DMCA Rampage: Embrace 100% data loss.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
temisturk
OK, sorry, I didn't mean to be a rantygirl but your arguments are all so circular... You guys are focussing on the trees and missing the forest
Rather, you're just pulling the topic away from our original point, which was originally that usenet users are inherently more protected than vpn'd bittorrent users, and are now making a case of how usenet service providers are more liable targets than vpn providers (which I would agree with).
Either way, I'd feel safe enough grabbing files off demonoid and btjunkie with no encryption or vpn the sell point of usenet for me is not having to deal with bt drama, mods/admins/users, keeping track of multiple sites, seeding woes (file relocation for every file I move around since I use my own filenames for EVERY file I download), etc.
-
Re: Giganews DMCA Rampage: Embrace 100% data loss.
That's not away from the point that is the point. Users are only vulnerable if pressure can be brought to bear on the people who know their identities--the VPN or Usenet providers--and you've just agreed that Usenet providers are "more liable targets".
But I'm with you: either way I'd feel safe.
As for your other points I'm going to pass on taking up that argument today, in case I develop an irritable bowel. :D
-
Re: Giganews DMCA Rampage: Embrace 100% data loss.
IMO the difference between usenet and torrenting from a seedbox or vpn is that copyright holders can see if a file is been downloaded from a torrent and an ip address of who is doing it. With usenet they have no idea who if anyone is downloading unless they get hold of the providers logs - for which they would really need proof that people were downloading. For this reason I would say that for downloaders usenet is safer than torrenting via a vpn/seedbox.
-
Re: Giganews DMCA Rampage: Embrace 100% data loss.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
temisturk
the VPN or Usenet providers
Or use both together. Still I think a VPN is a fake security, unless you find a provider that will never hand out your real IP when the associations knock at the door with some of their IP listed as performing illegal activity.
-
Re: Giganews DMCA Rampage: Embrace 100% data loss.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
temisturk
in case I develop an irritable bowel. :D
<wisecrack redacted>