The RIAA Attacks Usenet

**Broken** · 10-17-2007, 05:24 AM

The way Usenet works is that everything is mirrored from one provider to another.
For example, if I post a file on Giganews that file will then be mirrored by every other provider... Usenetserver, PowerUsenet, Newsdemon, right,down to the Usenet servers hosted by people's ISPs. It's not a very efficient protocol.

It's not that one file "A" is hosted on server "A". It's that every file on Usenet is hosted on every collection of servers (Ideally, there are completion issues and failures of some providers to host some groups).

Under Title II of the DMCA (17 U.S.C. § 511 and following), an ISP can avoid financial liability by following the "notice and takedown" provisions, should one of its subscribers offer infringing copy online. These provisions basically state that once an ISP receives notice of the infringement, it must take down the unauthorized material. Which Usenet providers do. These people are running a business and follow the law.

The only other conditions to be meet...
The ISP not obtain financial benefit from the infringement , not have actual knowledge or awareness of facts indicating infringing transmissions, upon learning of an infringing transmission act quickly to remove or disable access to the infringing transmission, andmplement a policy of terminating the accounts of subscribers who are repeat infringers.

**mbucari1** · 10-17-2007, 03:39 PM

interesting Broken.

So do you not believe it's probable that this suit will hurt usenet? I know that the providers have many more resources available to them than file sharers, but I'm still concerned that the RIAA may come out of the suit with at least a partial victory.

If it became law that Usenet providers must log uploads and that they must hand over those reports upon subpoena, then usenet might begin to wither away

**Broken** · 10-17-2007, 04:08 PM

In the original post on torrentfreak...

"Therefore it’s no surprise that the lawsuit seems to hang on statements allegedly made by Usenet.com to their customers, claiming that they told them their service is “the best way to get ‘free’ music now that ‘file sharing websites are getting shut down.”

This would seemingly violate the terms of the DMCA in that

The only other conditions to be meet...
The ISP not obtain financial benefit from the infringement , not have actual knowledge or awareness of facts indicating infringing transmissions....

I do not believe that it'll hurt Usenet on a whole.
But it will remind the carriers that they can't make stupid statements encouraging or condoning illegal pirate activity. I believe that the statement on their website is so vague that this whole thing will come to nothing. They don't really say, "get your illegal downloads here!", but they come close.

This isn't about the legality of Usenet.
But the encouragement of illegal activity by a provider.

**Smeghead^** · 10-17-2007, 05:42 PM

just a short question here - lets say usenet.com is taken down - that means only their servers conencted to the usenet network will dissapear meaning less mirrors ?

if thats the case - how big is the usenet.com network ? will it affect users using giganews.com or the connection between them has no importance to ppl using a different usenet provider ?

another article here: http://www.wired.com/politics/law/ne...10/riaa_usenet

cheers

**killuminati96** · 10-17-2007, 08:42 PM

It was just a matter of time. oh well At least now the elitists can shut up. I barely even get music thru P2P anymore anyway. I go on fan sites and we share our album rips personally thru file hosting sites.

I still need P2P for that rare song here and there tho.

**Broken** · 10-18-2007, 05:52 AM

Originally Posted by Smeghead^

just a short question here - lets say usenet.com is taken down - that means only their servers conencted to the usenet network will dissapear meaning less mirrors ?

if thats the case - how big is the usenet.com network ? will it affect users using giganews.com or the connection between them has no importance to ppl using a different usenet provider ?

another article here: http://www.wired.com/politics/law/ne...10/riaa_usenet

cheers

If Usenet.com (don't let the name fool you they are nobodies with a good domain name) suddenly disappeared it would have the same effect on Usenet as the disappearance of a carrier like NetZero would have on the internet... none.

I think some people are confused.
Usenet is not the most efferent protocol, it is very old. Each carrier mirrors every other carrier, but no one carrier is dependent on the others. Each provider has their very own server farm with a complete mirror of Usenet. Each carrier takes care of their own machines, and how well they mirror the other providers. If you have a poor carrier their servers will have lots of errors do to poor mirror of other carriers.

**psxcite** · 10-18-2007, 12:28 PM

Exactly. If the RIAA wants to rattle it's saber, that's all they will do. Their case won't hold water. Are they going to sue AT&T and TimeWarner next? Cause guess what? They all have usenet servers.

They want to pick on one little company in hopes of setting a precedent in court. Thereby forcing every organization which hosts a usenet server to shut them down. It won't happen.

What's next? Sue the HDD companies for creating a medium for storing warez? Or levy a tax against blank CD and DVD producers because everyone knows thats all they are used for.

Gimme a break. The RIAA will get it's ass handed to them in court this time.

**TheFoX** · 10-18-2007, 01:40 PM

I think the number of mirrors is probably countless. As well as the dedicated news servers themselves, almost each ISP will also mirror usenet.

Here is a list of the top 1000 servers...

http://news.anthologeek.net/top1000.current.txt

and that is just the first 1000.

While the process may be an outdated mode, it still works relatively well.

The only reason why someone may pick a specific usenet service is for one main reason only, and that is data retention. The cheaper services often purge older data earlier, whereas paid for services will keep data for a longer duration. You would need to check your own usenet service for retention time.

Hitting Usenet.com is like trying to kill a swarm of mosquitoes with a swat. You may get one or two, but the rest then bite your arse till it is red raw. Lets hope the RIAA get their arse bitten, or at least lose several billion in failed lawsuit costs (even they must have budgetary requirements, otherwise the cost of lawsuits would seriously damage their profit margins).