Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

RightsCorp To Bring Its Controversial Copyright Protection Tactics To Europe

Unknown Lamer posted about 5 months ago | from the export-grade-copyright-trolls dept.

Piracy 196

judgecorp (778838) writes "RightsCorp, the controversial copyright enforcer, is planning to begin operations in Europe. In the U.S., the company scans torrents for IP addresses on behalf of media companies, shares them with ISPs, forcing them to send lawyers' letters (using the DMCA) demanding money from the supposed copyright infringers. RightsCorp says Europe needs its help in fighting piracy." They recently expanded operations into Canada as well.

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

RightsCorp (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46938517)

More like YuoHaveNoRightsCorp!!

Thank you, i'll be here all week.

Re:RightsCorp (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46938541)

Right. Because you should have the right to break the law and go unpunished? Although I may not agree with the way we got to this point, I don't have a problem with what they are doing per se. We need to change the rules.

Re:RightsCorp (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46938601)

Haven't we had multiple court cases and appeals end in the decision that "IP address != real person"?

I guess the people being sent the letters just don't want to deal with the legal hassle. There's a business model for you... "paying us money is cheaper than legally proving you don't owe us money". You'd think that'd be classified as extortion.

Re:RightsCorp (1)

morgauxo (974071) | about 5 months ago | (#46938777)

Welcome to the party! Where ya been?

Re:RightsCorp (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46938789)

Not when the laws are written by lawyers and ex-lawyers. Then it's just called job security.

Re:RightsCorp (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46938809)

Haven't we had multiple court cases and appeals end in the decision that "IP address != real person"?

In the U.S., yes.

But what about all the other countries? We can start over!

Re:RightsCorp (2)

StripedCow (776465) | about 5 months ago | (#46938857)

Haven't we had multiple court cases and appeals end in the decision that "IP address != real person"?

Oh, but don't worry. They are already lobbying for "IP address == real person".
The "internet passport" is coming sooner than you might think.

Re:RightsCorp (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46939509)

Good. Then we only have to show that RightsCorp's IP accessed child porn to put their CEO in jail.

Re:RightsCorp (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46938657)

Hey, the copyright shills are here.

Re:RightsCorp (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46938673)

I thought the laws were suppose to be what the majority wanted, you know "democratically".

Most didn't want infinitely extended copywrite laws and zero chance of the content ever going to the public domain.

Re:RightsCorp (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46938699)

No, this is incorrect. If it were, the minimum wage would be at $10.10 right now (an overwhelmingly popular proposition). We live in a representative republic, where a small group of elected officials make the laws that the entire country must follow. The small group has been purchased by moneyed interests and big corporations. Throw in some vocal radical minorities and voter apathy, and that is how stuff like this happens.

Re:RightsCorp (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46938743)

If by "most" you mean the unions whose wages are set as a multiple of the minimum wage. Also, the minimum wage isn't supposed to be a living wage. Etc., etc.

Re:RightsCorp (5, Insightful)

NotSanguine (1917456) | about 5 months ago | (#46939347)

Also, the minimum wage isn't supposed to be a living wage.

And why is that? Someone working full-time should be able to at least support themselves. Or is that too much to ask? Actually, it feeds right into the oligarchs' plans. Keep the great unwashed too poor and busy working two or three jobs to get involved and make a positive difference for themselves and their fellow citizens.

It's disgusting. Even $10.10/hour is only $21,008/year, assuming a 40 hour work week and no time off at all. That breaks down to gross pay of $1751/month. That's net pay (assuming 15% withholding for federal taxes and 6.25% SS/Medicare withholding) of $1378.65/month (note, this does not include state or local taxes, so it's less in places where those taxes apply). Yes, I know that folks making that wage will likely get most of that back as a tax refund, but that doesn't help them on a day to day basis.

So. A single person making ~$1400/month. Please tell me how many of you could live on that. Just you, not your kids or your spouse. And if you have a couple of young kids and need day care, clothes, car, food, electricity (should that be optional?), etc., etc., etc?

But the minimum wage isn't $10.10/hour. It's $7.25/hour. After taxes, that works out to be $989.63/month. Try living on that. Sigh.

I just did some simple calculations. Apparently, that's too difficult for some people. Or they're selfish, mean-spirited jerks who have no empathy. What do we call those with no empathy? Sociopaths.

In the richest country that *ever* existed, in an era of post-scarcity (at least here in the US) with productivity through the roof and increasing rapidly, how can we allow this? It just makes me want to hurl.

Re:RightsCorp (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46939621)

Chili's pays £2/hour. The staff are paid with your tips.

Re:RightsCorp (1)

NotSanguine (1917456) | about 5 months ago | (#46940015)

Chili's pays £2/hour. The staff are paid with your tips.

Not with my tips. I don't eat at Chili's, nor do I live in the UK. But yes, restaurant wait staff often don't even get the minimum wage. Disgusting, isn't it?

Re:RightsCorp (1)

zitsky (303560) | about 5 months ago | (#46939999)

Are you willing to pay higher taxes, and higher prices on things you buy? Because that's what has to happen. If businesses pay higher wages, they will pass the cost on to you. I agree that people should be paid a living wage, but that money has to come from somewhere.

Re:RightsCorp (3, Insightful)

NotSanguine (1917456) | about 5 months ago | (#46940239)

Are you willing to pay higher taxes, and higher prices on things you buy? Because that's what has to happen. If businesses pay higher wages, they will pass the cost on to you. I agree that people should be paid a living wage, but that money has to come from somewhere.

Yes. And the tax code should be modified to incentivize reinvestment so that the 100,000 or so folks those who control 40% of the wealth in this country will put it into circulation, perhaps then 30% of our children won't have to live in poverty. Oh? Your kids don't have that problem, so fuck everyone else? I pity you.

Misdirection. (2)

CaptainNerdCave (982411) | about 5 months ago | (#46940339)

Does this smell anything like the platform that our current president ran on, twice?

We don't need to pay more in taxes, we need to stop spending so much on things like war, unnecessary civil developments (Silent railroad crossings?), corporate welfare, politician pensions, etc. You're addressing a symptom of the problem, not the root: government spending and thieving to support private interests that are funneled through government spending.

Re:Misdirection. (1)

DocSavage64109 (799754) | about 5 months ago | (#46940467)

What is discouraging is how do we decide what programs to really cut? Some want to cut civil programs and keep or increase military spending. Others want to do the opposite. It seems to be hard to determine what we should actually do.

Re:RightsCorp (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46940471)

You're already paying that extra money, it just disappears into your taxes and gets multiplied by the legion of bureaucrats who administer the steaming pile known collectively as the tax and welfare systems.

Re:RightsCorp (2)

tranquilidad (1994300) | about 5 months ago | (#46940021)

It's impossible for me to understand your logic.

I've certainly lived off a lot less than that (either of your numbers), quite comfortably. I once worked three jobs to be able to afford 1/2 a bedroom in a two bedroom apartment with three other guys. It created an incentive for me to find a more efficient way to earn what I needed in order to live in the style I wanted to live.

At what point did it become necessary that the government mandate a wage level so that people can live the way they want without incentive to live better?

Really, you think I'm a mean-spirited jerk with no empathy because I want people to have an incentive to get a better life and improve their skills?

What is your hierarchy of needs list that makes it so difficult to "live on" $1,000/month? Do we need to mandate a wage so that people can live alone in their own apartment or house? How large? Should they be able to have cell phone service, internet service? How about a computer? What kind?

Get a roommate or two and pool your resources.

In the richest country that *ever* existed, in an era of post-scarcity (at least here in the US) with productivity through the roof and increasing rapidly, how can we allow the removal of incentives for people to work hard and get ahead and make something of themselves.

Just because some fail doesn't mean we should dumb down the entire system so you don't hurt. Fear of failure is a great incentive.

I'd prefer to keep telling people that with hard work they can become something. It might not be easy but they will be all the more satisfied when they succeed.

Your argument strikes me as wanting to tell people the "man" is keeping you down and you'll never succeed so don't work hard and we'll make sure you can live a life of relative luxury.

Forget all that and explain the economics that would allow raising everyone's pay to live the standard you've set without causing a rise in the cost of living at that level.

Re:RightsCorp (5, Informative)

Microlith (54737) | about 5 months ago | (#46940325)

I once worked three jobs to be able to afford 1/2 a bedroom in a two bedroom apartment with three other guys.

What is this supposed to be, a badge of honor? Or is this stockholm syndrome? "Well I subjected myself to systemic abuse and overwork to just barely keep myself from becoming homless! There's nothing wrong with that!"

At what point did it become necessary that the government mandate a wage level so that people can live the way they want without incentive to live better?

At the moment it was obvious that corporations were more powerful than most people, and would would abuse them to the extent they could get away with.

you think I'm a mean-spirited jerk with no empathy because I want people to have an incentive to get a better life and improve their skills?

You're a mean spirited jerk because you assume that people who live in poverty have the time and resources to improve their skills.

Get a roommate or two and pool your resources.

Which works well for a small subset of people.

In the richest country that *ever* existed, in an era of post-scarcity (at least here in the US) with productivity through the roof and increasing rapidly, how can we allow the removal of incentives for people to work hard and get ahead and make something of themselves.

Indeed, in the richest country that ever existed why are people paid such poor wages and so often do without basic necessities (that they can't afford due to said same low wages)? Don't worry, the corporations you exalt are doing a great job at removing incentives for people to work hard by ensuring that hard work doesn't necessarily pay off.

Your argument strikes me as wanting to tell people the "man" is keeping you down and you'll never succeed so don't work hard and we'll make sure you can live a life of relative luxury.

No, it's about pointing out how the system is rigged and they are being taken advantage of for the sake of quarterly profits.

Re:RightsCorp (3, Informative)

NotSanguine (1917456) | about 5 months ago | (#46940337)

It's impossible for me to understand your logic.

I've certainly lived off a lot less than that (either of your numbers), quite comfortably. I once worked three jobs to be able to afford 1/2 a bedroom in a two bedroom apartment with three other guys. It created an incentive for me to find a more efficient way to earn what I needed in order to live in the style I wanted to live.

At what point did it become necessary that the government mandate a wage level so that people can live the way they want without incentive to live better?

Really, you think I'm a mean-spirited jerk with no empathy because I want people to have an incentive to get a better life and improve their skills?

What is your hierarchy of needs list that makes it so difficult to "live on" $1,000/month? Do we need to mandate a wage so that people can live alone in their own apartment or house? How large? Should they be able to have cell phone service, internet service? How about a computer? What kind?

Get a roommate or two and pool your resources.

In the richest country that *ever* existed, in an era of post-scarcity (at least here in the US) with productivity through the roof and increasing rapidly, how can we allow the removal of incentives for people to work hard and get ahead and make something of themselves.

Just because some fail doesn't mean we should dumb down the entire system so you don't hurt. Fear of failure is a great incentive.

I'd prefer to keep telling people that with hard work they can become something. It might not be easy but they will be all the more satisfied when they succeed.

Your argument strikes me as wanting to tell people the "man" is keeping you down and you'll never succeed so don't work hard and we'll make sure you can live a life of relative luxury.

Forget all that and explain the economics that would allow raising everyone's pay to live the standard you've set without causing a rise in the cost of living at that level.

Just to make sure I understand what you're saying. You believe that there is equal opportunity for all in this country? You should get out more, friend. I'm not going to try to disabuse you of your illusions. I just feel sorry for you.

Yes. Because that works so well for us. With 30% of the children in this country living in poverty? That we incentivize greed and graft? That it takes the *average* (not the lowest paid) worker in a large corporation more than a week to earn what the CEO earns in an hour? You can't tell me that the CEO works hundreds of times harder, can you?

In the incredibly rich society that we live in, we should be able to provide equal opportunity for all and create an environment where social mobility is increasing, not decreasing. Which it has been for the last 30 years or so.

Re:RightsCorp (1)

Lumpy (12016) | about 5 months ago | (#46940427)

When did you live off of that? because even just 5 years ago it was a lot cheaper for the poor.

Right now in a fricking trailer park Lot rent is on average $450 a month. and that is of you OWN the trailer, if you are renting the trailer that is another $400-$600 on top of the lot rent. Plus Heat, electric, and water are bills on top of those, God help you if you are in a 1970's shithold trailer that will cost $450 a month to heat in the winter.

So JUST for a place to legally live. $450+$400 for the trailer you are renting, $225 for heat in the winter means $100 on average for heating, $50 for electricity a month, and $15 a month for water, you dont need to bathe more than 1X a week.
$1015 ALONE for a legal place to live and sleep. so you have a whopping $395 a month for food and expenses to get to and from work. So let''s take the bus, because nobody can legally afford a car on those wages. $120 a month for bus fare, You have a Massive $275 a month for food, clothing, and work expenses. Hope you dont get sick because you cant afford the romneycare that the country was forced to have. Even with the subsidies for being poor making only $10 an hour you have to pay $200 a month, that is not in your budget.

So lets look at real clothing costs. Shopping goodwill or second hand stores, You can afford a $10.00 used pair of pants and a $10.00 used shirt each month to replace those that wear out, Oh we have to do laundry! $15 a week at the laundrymat for a single load of laundry, plus $4.00 to get there and back. so we now have $236 and we still have not bought any food. Granted scumbag rich people will say "just eat ramen" yeah if you want to die, Through the roof sodium and nutritionally empty ramen is a good replacement for a single meal daily, but you need protein and other things. Realistically a good CHEAP eating properly is about $8.00 a day. IF you are ok with letting your health slide, you can do it for $6.00 a day. so let's go there. $6.00 a day for 30 days (yes you have to eat on weekends) $180 for food so we are down to $56.00 for the month for extravagant luxury items like razor blades to shave, soap, shampoo, deodorant, Oh hope you don't have a cold or the flu because you work minimum wage so the owner will fire your ass if you call in sick, so you need over the counter meds So there is $30 for that month, you could save money by searching your neighbors trash for used razer blades.

So what do I have left over $26.00 a month for go insane with! where as reality is that $26 is consumed by fees for cashing my paycheck at a check cashing place or worse the debit card scam that the employer forced the worker into. Those things take fees for every single transaction, so that $26 is gone at the end of the month.

Looking at what I calculated from what I see is costs today..... Damn why dont more people live high on the hog like that? And If I'm lucky I can get a room mate that will steal food from me or might pay the rent on time... Then I'm really high on the hog living the luxury lifestyle!

Re:RightsCorp (1)

CaptainNerdCave (982411) | about 5 months ago | (#46940085)

Please, get off your soap-box.

monthly expense
500 apartment
300 groceries
300 transportation expense
100 utilities
total necessary expenses = 1200

Granted, I live in a smaller city, but Minneapolis is about the same cost, unless you need to go a great distance for work. Just outside of DC is also about the same. A nicer home, car, and children are not necessities. As an adult, I spent 10 years working for less than $10\hr. A large number of people I know make less than $10\hr. In fact, I made less than $8\hr until I was 26, and I was still able to live rather comfortably because I didn't waste money on things that I didn't need.

Does this mean that I think things are fine? No, I agree that income disparity is a horrible problem in a country where the "average" income is $75k\year, but very few of us know anyone who makes that much money.

Re:RightsCorp (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46940345)

500 apartment

Just outside of DC is also about the same.

Uh, what? People in the DC/MD/VA area rent out their basement broom closet for 900 a month.

Re:RightsCorp (2)

NotSanguine (1917456) | about 5 months ago | (#46940511)

Please, get off your soap-box.

monthly expense 500 apartment 300 groceries 300 transportation expense 100 utilities total necessary expenses = 1200

Granted, I live in a smaller city, but Minneapolis is about the same cost, unless you need to go a great distance for work. Just outside of DC is also about the same. A nicer home, car, and children are not necessities. As an adult, I spent 10 years working for less than $10\hr. A large number of people I know make less than $10\hr. In fact, I made less than $8\hr until I was 26, and I was still able to live rather comfortably because I didn't waste money on things that I didn't need.

Does this mean that I think things are fine? No, I agree that income disparity is a horrible problem in a country where the "average" income is $75k\year, but very few of us know anyone who makes that much money.

No. I won't "get off my soapbox." Don't want to listen to me? Fine. But I suggest you educate yourself as to the facts. You're thinking, "well, I did it so everyone else's circumstances must be the same. If they can't hack it, they must be stupid or lazy." Think about what you're saying.

So I guess you never had to go to the doctor or dentist? Buy clothes, linens or towels? Replace furniture or appliances? Save a little money for retirement? Pay off your six figure student loans?

Lucky you never got hit by a car or had all your possessions stolen or a hurricane, flood or tornado destroy your home.

BTW, According to the US Census Bureau, The 2011 Median Income of US households was $50,054 per annum. [wikipedia.org] That's for a household with ~2.5. That breaks down to a bout $20,000 per person. Something like 30% of children in this country live in a household that has income below the official povery line.

Things are much worse than you think. Oh, and you're right, having children isn't a necessity. We don't need to propagate the species, do we?

Re:RightsCorp (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46938761)

Well, I happen to live in Canada and these guys are having some real problems pulling off their "jane and john doe" lawsuits here (and rightflully so).
The position many have taken is these lawsuits are a form of "Speculative invoicing" and the Canadian courts don't allow this (it is considered "fraud on the courts").

They have also attempted to "bundle" the lawsuits to keep their court costs low, and again this is being questioned.

You can read more here: http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/6805/125/

I guess given enough pressure from the US canada will take a similar view and start all the lawsuit stuff where single moms are forced into bankruptcy when they would face no such charge had they actually just stolen the CD.

Re:RightsCorp (2)

frog_strat (852055) | about 5 months ago | (#46939829)

Posting to undo accidental moderation. (Is there another way to undo ?)

Re:RightsCorp (1)

tommeke100 (755660) | about 5 months ago | (#46940387)

The article says that RightsCorp sends settlements for 20$ a title.
So, it's not like they will sue you for thousands if you happen to download the latest GoT episode.
Although I don't concur with their process (sneak their way into getting personal info by avoiding courts), at least they are asking for a 'reasonable settlement'.

Re:RightsCorp (0)

ArcadeMan (2766669) | about 5 months ago | (#46940553)

If they are only asking for 20$ per "pirated" CD, then it makes the Samsung tactic [macrumors.com] * viable.

* steal all you can until you get caught, the fines will never be as high as the value of what you've stolen.

Not to mention that in Canada, we're supposed to have the right to copy for individual use. That includes downloads. Just set your upload speed to zero, become a P2P leech and you're legal.

Re:RightsCorp (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46938705)

Democracy does not work.

Even Winston Churchill said this...

Re:RightsCorp (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46939399)

The US is not a democracy so it would be tough to say it doesn't work if that is your point of reference
"
America is no longer a democracy — never mind the democratic republic envisioned by Founding Fathers.
Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/apr/21/americas-oligarchy-not-democracy-or-republic-unive/#ixzz312UtFVAK
"

That is the point i made on my first post here. If the laws were democratic people might not have such an issue with them. Suing people to bankruptcy over a single song? Not sure how much of the population would agree with such a law, yet it is "on the books".

Re:RightsCorp (1)

fustakrakich (1673220) | about 5 months ago | (#46940351)

I thought the laws were suppose to be what the majority wanted, you know "democratically".

They are what the majority wants, the majority of dollars, one dollar one vote. What could be more "democratic"?

Re:RightsCorp (1)

MightyMartian (840721) | about 5 months ago | (#46939779)

And how do you propose going about changing the rules when an incredibly well-funded lobby essentially has the bulk of Congress in its back pocket, and no way to ever dislodge them?

Re:RightsCorp (1)

fustakrakich (1673220) | about 5 months ago | (#46940391)

Oh, I don't know. I suppose people could tune out the big money campaigns and vote for somebody different, but they don't want to take any unnecessary risks. I don't blame money for love of the same.

1st (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46938527)

1st

Re:1st (1)

callmetheraven (711291) | about 5 months ago | (#46939823)

fail

Get out (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46938529)

Nobody wants you here.

Hi, I'm a copyright enforcement company. (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46938547)

And I shall sell you lists of IP addresses for $10 each.

They correspond to people torrenting files without the copyright owner's permission.

I swear.

Re:Hi, I'm a copyright enforcement company. (1)

Andreas . (2995185) | about 5 months ago | (#46938607)

This... This is sadly pretty accurate :(

Re:Hi, I'm a copyright enforcement company. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46938819)

This... This is sadly pretty accurate :(

Yes, and I can't wait until the day comes when they fuck with the wrong IP.

Billionaires use the internet too. WrongsCorp needs to be handed a legal battle they wish they would have never asked for with wrongful accusation in order for this shit to end.

Re:Hi, I'm a copyright enforcement company. (1)

biodata (1981610) | about 5 months ago | (#46938801)

Wait, so under DMCA anyone can extort $10 per IP address out of ISPs by claiming they are involved in piracy? Glad I live in Europe where this could never happen.

Re:Hi, I'm a copyright enforcement company. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46939745)

Glad I live in Europe where this could never happen.

In case you're not joking here...

You are aware that the DMCA is just the U.S. implementation of the WIPO Copyright Treaty, right? You know, the one that nearly every country in Europe also signed.

Re:Hi, I'm a copyright enforcement company. (4, Interesting)

Bigbutt (65939) | about 5 months ago | (#46938941)

Did you RTFA? Apparently RightsCorp gives the ISP the list of IPs for free. They make their money off of the folks who do the downloading ("for $20 per track or movie we'll remove your name from this list we're sending to your ISP"). Anyone still on the list goes to the ISP who is legally required to send letters to the subscriber. This increases their chances of losing the customer. Without the list of IPs provided by RightsCorp, the ISP legally doesn't have to do anything.

So "I'll sell you this list of IP addresses for $10 each" would be met with "sorry, no idea who you are or what you're talking about, kthxby"

Sounds more like Blackmail.

[John]

Re:Hi, I'm a copyright enforcement company. (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46939855)

Without the list of IPs provided by RightsCorp, the ISP legally doesn't have to do anything.

Even with said list, EU ISPs do not have to do anything, unless it's a EUCD notice (like DMCA but for EU) and even then, the EUCD notice would have to be accurate, because if RightsCorp doesn't own the intellectual property, again the ISPs can safely ignore it.

Re:Hi, I'm a copyright enforcement company. (1)

Lumpy (12016) | about 5 months ago | (#46940463)

I'll give them a freebie.

Anyone that has the address 127.0.0.1 on their computer is a thief and you can bill them right now.

How? (1)

JasterBobaMereel (1102861) | about 5 months ago | (#46938599)

"... we are optimistic that there will be a way to do this in Europe"

We are optimistic that with the DCMA or Canadian equivalent this is not as simple as you think

Welcome (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46938605)

I don't think it's going to work on this side of the pond.

The link in the paragraph refers to the UK... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46938631)

I'm not even surprised.

Greed and the UK go hand in hand...

Re:The link in the paragraph refers to the UK... (2)

jabuzz (182671) | about 5 months ago | (#46940131)

Better still it has already been tried in the U.K. It failed spectacularly.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A... [wikipedia.org]

Porn (2)

clarkkent09 (1104833) | about 5 months ago | (#46938635)

I have a friend who makes great money in similar way but with porn. He searches file sharing sites on behalf of a bunch of porn producers and looks for their content and then tries to figure out who shared it (some sites sneakily attach the member id to each downloaded clip and there are other ways too). Then he has his lawyer send them a letter threatening a lawsuit but offering to settle for $500 or something. He makes sure that the letter contains in big bold font the clip title as well as a detailed description of the contents. Decent enough percentage of them just mail the check.

Re:Porn (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46938661)

So your friend is a blackmailer. The more you know ~~~*

Re:Porn (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46938719)

You're a smart one!

Re:Porn (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46938841)

"Letter before action" may look like blackmail, but it's perfectly fine from a legal standpoint. Just don't threaten with bodily harm or property harm. Only threaten with the court. Then it's not blackmail.

"Give me all your money or I'll take you to court" isn't illegal.

Re:Porn (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46939443)

Take that advise with a grain of salt. It all depends where the guy you are extorting lives. In Sweden, extortion by threatening to file a police report or lawsuit is a felony, punishable with 2 years in prison.

Re:Porn (2)

mSparks43 (757109) | about 5 months ago | (#46939645)

It's funny how Americans think the American law system applies to the rest of the world.

It's also not so much of an issue in the UK where it would go to small claims court which costs next to nothing to defend, and is comparably expensive to bring.

One piece of paper denying responsibility and citing lack of evidence (IP != responsibility) is enough to get it thrown out and they loose their filing fees.

afaik.

Re:Porn (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46939969)

It's an offer to settle out of court for the theft of intellectual property. That's not extortion.

Re:Porn (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46939451)

"Letter before action" may look like blackmail, but it's perfectly fine from a legal standpoint. Just don't threaten with bodily harm or property harm. Only threaten with the court. Then it's not blackmail.

"Give me all your money or I'll take you to court" isn't illegal.

Except the epic smackdown currently being experienced by Prenda Law across the United States for doing exactly that would seem to indicate otherwise.

Re:Porn (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46939693)

Only threaten with the court. Then it's not blackmail.

Yeah, that's called barratry.

Re:Porn (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46938913)

Either you need a better class of friend or you're a douchebag.

Because your friend is a douchebag.

Re:Porn (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46939013)

so you hang out with lowlifes and call them 'friend' ? ? ?
that makes you a scumbag by association...
BTW, did you know these scumbags typically SEED THE FILES THEMSELVES to ensnare the unlucky/unaware...
they are parasitic scum...

Your friend is the real criminal here. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46939403)

Have you considered that you are an accomplice to his crimes for not reporting him?

Indie (4, Interesting)

pr0fessor (1940368) | about 5 months ago | (#46938651)

My brother is in an indie band and they payed to go to a small but professional studio and record an EP. The content is all original and they have copyright but he saw a blog about indie bands publishing through tunecore on multiple services {iTunes, Google Play, Amazon, etc...} getting take down notices from companies claiming to represent the copyright holder.

He's a little freaked out because although they payed all that money for copyright and self publishing they really couldn't afford a lawyer if something like that happened to the band.

Re:Indie (2)

Threni (635302) | about 5 months ago | (#46938709)

He doesn't need a lawyer; just tell Google "that's BS - it's my copyright" and they'll put the content back up again.

Re:Indie (3, Insightful)

Sockatume (732728) | about 5 months ago | (#46938927)

...unless the spurious claimant continues to assert that it's the real owner, in which case Google washes its hands and says you've got to find a lawyer, take them to court, and prove that your own work actually does belong to you.

Re:Indie (1)

Threni (635302) | about 5 months ago | (#46939217)

No, Google puts it back up and it's for the company to then sue you/Google.

This was not a false claim (2)

voss (52565) | about 5 months ago | (#46939393)

This was an issue of Indmusic having a deal with Tunecore to monetize music published through its service. If you didnt publish your music
through tunecore then its not an issue. Your brother needs to read the TOS and decide if Tunecores uses of your brothers rights is what he wants.

Re:Indie (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46939061)

what fantasy world do you live in?

Re:Indie (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46938735)

Well then tell him it's time to get a cubicle job like the rest of us.

Re:Indie (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46939281)

Wouldn't it be better to produce an album and be paid for the rest of your life, and your kids lives as well for it?

Re: Indie (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46938763)

i get those infringement notices by youtube all the time - except that i have all the right to use the material in question (i make music videos) - it's a hassle, that's usually sorted out by an e-mail - still, it's fucking annoying to constantly "clear" the rights of material, you already have the rights to - often multiple times - because some stupid program identifies the material as belonging to someone you've licensed it to.

it also cost's money (time).
i think, copyright holders should pay a small fine for every wrong infingement notice that could have been avoided.

Re: Indie (3, Interesting)

140Mandak262Jamuna (970587) | about 5 months ago | (#46939099)

i think, copyright holders should pay a small fine for every wrong infingement notice that could have been avoided.

Why small? May be it should start small and escalate based on each false claim they have filed, may be exponentially. Also small should be in relation to the size and strength of the spurious claimer. What is small for RIAA is not huge for the lone indie trying to get his/her work back from the false claimers.

Re: Indie (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46939381)

Why small? May be it should start small and escalate based on each false claim they have filed, may be exponentially.

Lets take a hint from an old math class.

The fine for a false DMCA claim is to begin at one tenth of a cent, doubling each additional infraction. The count will be reset after 2 years of no false DMCA claims.
It's small enough that individual content authors can safely have a few bad arguments, but it grows at a nice clip so the DMCA trolls will have to slow down and/or start wasting some cash on new LLCs every couple months.

Re: Indie (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46939155)

i think, copyright holders should pay a small fine for every wrong infingement notice that could have been avoided.

You mean, copyright pretenders. I disagree. They should pay a large fine. We are talking about tortious business interference here.

And preferably with a three-strikes scheme. Three wrongful accusations, and you get put on a national copyright offender registry and are barred from making DMCA claims. Instead you have to go to court, and when you don't prevail, pay the court fees of the defendant as a rule.

The cost of handing those industries a free pass for abuse is just too high and interferes with civic life. Some misdemeanors are not worth the cost of pursuing to society.

Re: Indie (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46939409)

How about revenge?

The person/corp issuing takedown notices to you, have their own content somewhere. (Or they wouldn't have anything to protect) Surely they have something online, like advertising, short clips, trailers or whatever. So issue equally bogus takedown notices against them!

I have the impression that it is mostly big players that issue these takedowns - if lots of people retaliate occationally, then they will feel the resistance.

Or consider a class-action lawsuit against them. Handling a bogus takedown cost you time, which is money. As well as the indirect cost of the downtime. It might not amount to much in each single case, but if every bogus takedown is punished with some money . . .

Please do this in Italy (3, Interesting)

spiritplumber (1944222) | about 5 months ago | (#46938667)

send a letter like that to the wrong person, you will see exactly what happens if you set up a protection racket where the marketplace is already full.

Mobel India (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46938689)

Mobel Furniture - Coffee Tables Just Arrived in Store!

Mobel has introduced a whole new collection of Coffee Tables in modern designs now available in all Mobel stores across Kolkata and Bangalore. You can even buy them online at www.mobelhomestore.com. Glass tops with beautiful etching make these centre tables unique. The tables have shelves and drawers to give you functionality with style in your living room. Superior quality and customer service is what makes Mobel the right place for your furniture needs. So spruce up your home with furniture from your favourite furniture store in Kolkata and Bangalore! You can also avail the Furniture Exchange offer and get additional 20% off on giving us your old furniture. So check out the latest designs now!
http://www.mobelhomestore.com/c/89/coffee-tables

criminal scumbags (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46938711)

so, where exactly is the difference between these honorable businessmen and other "honorable businessmen"?

all your monies (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46938853)

vertical control of legislation, content creation, distribution, sale, and consumption.
ya know. cultural fascism.

Re:criminal scumbags (2)

hebertrich (472331) | about 5 months ago | (#46938965)

Who told you there was such a thing as a " honorable " businessmen in the first place.. ?
Everyone that wears a tie and suit is a scumbag in disguise. Never, ever, trust someone because he wears a suit.
Politicians are the best example of this.

Re:criminal scumbags (1)

bickerdyke (670000) | about 5 months ago | (#46939167)

Well, one half are honorable businessmen, the other half are "honorable businessmen"....

TTIP? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46938755)

seams they think there will be some laws in TTIP that will let them bend over euros just like you amis

PS.
TTIP == https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transatlantic_Trade_and_Investment_Partnership

make money fast :) (1)

blackest_k (761565) | about 5 months ago | (#46938771)

So let me see if I have this right
connect to a torrent and collect $10 from each person torrenting the file by notifying the ISP of the infringement, aint that great I can leach off this copyrighted stuff and make a bundle.

Using the DMCA, I thought A was for America anyway.

So which is the biggest paracite? The torrenters or RightsCorp?

You're not in Kansas anymore Toto (2)

Jahta (1141213) | about 5 months ago | (#46938867)

From TFA:

I can’t give any specific dates, but we are getting a great reception from everyone we have spoken to [in the UK],” RightsCorp co-founder and CEO Robert Steele told TechWeekEurope.

It's significant, I think, that he singles out the UK which is becoming increasingly like the 51st state in legal/civil rights terms.

In the rest of Europe I'd suggest they won't find the legal and regulatory environment anything like as forgiving of their methods as the U.S.

Re:You're not in Kansas anymore Toto (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46940283)

From TFA:

I can’t give any specific dates, but we are getting a great reception from everyone we have spoken to [in the UK],” RightsCorp co-founder and CEO Robert Steele told TechWeekEurope.

It's significant, I think, that he singles out the UK which is becoming increasingly like the 51st state in legal/civil rights terms.

Care to give some examples?

I think you are full of crap.

Re:You're not in Kansas anymore Toto (1)

jabuzz (182671) | about 5 months ago | (#46940411)

The won't find it that forgiving in the United Kingdom either. There has already been a copyright troll like this who tried to operate in the U.K. They are barred from practice at the moment and bankrupt. I suggest you search for "acs:law" to see how well it panned out for the last person who tried this.

Re:You're not in Kansas anymore Toto (1)

fustakrakich (1673220) | about 5 months ago | (#46940523)

...UK which is becoming increasingly like the 51st state in legal/civil rights terms.

All of you are wagging the dog. The UK has always led the way for repressive action in Oceania. It is the US that is following.

Greedy Arrogance (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46938923)

So why is Rightscorp using these DMCA subpoenas? We asked the company, and CEO Christopher Sabec said that they believe the court made the wrong decision at the time. According to Sabec the verdict won’t hold up at the Supreme Court, so they’re ignoring it.

The sheer arrogance of these scumbags. Instead of challenging the clear legal precedent, they plan on just ignoring it until someone counter-sues them. I hope Rightscorp gets sued back into the stone age. I don't condone piracy, but I've read too many articles about scummy corporations claiming copyright over things that are clearly not theirs and get away with it because it takes too much money to fight them in court. [[http://yro.slashdot.org/story/12/02/26/2141246/youtube-identifies-birdsong-as-copyrighted-music]]

Re:Greedy Arrogance (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46939973)

"sued back into the stone age" doesn't work for "corp" The corp dissolves, and the people take the money and make another corp. "Bombed back to the stone age" won't really help because they don't use their own infrastructure. If you want to hope for successful elimination of these pests, it's probably best to hope someone hires their murder on a dark market.

Just like Europe needs the U.S.A. for human rights (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46939025)

I was being sarcastic. Obama, are you listening? I know you are. I was being sarcastic. Don't get ideas.

Yeah... this isn't going to fly (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46939051)

In the European constitution, as well as in even stronger language various countries' constitutions, a right to privacy. The act of scanning a torrent for European IP addresses is already a gray area in the right to privacy. And then ask ISPs to divulge to whom the IP belongs is another major breach of privacy.

Said it best ? (3, Insightful)

hebertrich (472331) | about 5 months ago | (#46939075)

There's an old cut from Fila Brazillia and they said it well ..

" Suck a tailpipe , fucking hang yourself , borrow a gun from a yank friend .. i dont care how you do it ,just rid the world of your fu****** evil machinations "
" kill yourself "

Dosen't it just sum up what everyone thinks about the copyrights lobby ?

im pretty sure it wasnt by choice. (2)

nimbius (983462) | about 5 months ago | (#46939369)

The problem is Americans arent coughing up the cash. instead with the help of the FSF and other dedicated groups, courts are beginning to agree that IP addresses arent people. Most courts unanimously concede that movie studios cant sue regular people for infinite money either like they used to in the metallica napster days. And honestly, most ISP's are large enough to either ignore the service, lie about their compliance, or tell the RIAA to piss off. Comcast, who isnt an RIAA or MPAA member, could threaten to use DPI to black hole any references to a top ten artist for entire states like vermont if they were beholden to this extortion experiment.
Europe on the other hand (and lets not forget that abbott fucker whos slowly turning his country back into a prison colony) hasnt been privy to this dog and pony show. Maybe it will work, maybe it wont, but for Rightscorp to just sit on its rump and not try to expand means a slow death.

Re:im pretty sure it wasnt by choice. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46939629)

Comcast owns Universal Studios. So at least one part if it is an MPAA member.

I anticipate trouble. (1)

SuricouRaven (1897204) | about 5 months ago | (#46939801)

The copyright term for parts of Europe is often less than in the US. I've a nice site I made that contains a lot of music which is public domain here in the UK, but still under copyright in the US. Unless they are very careful about dates, they are likely to end up threatening people for sharing music that is public domain because their bots are configured for the wrong jurisdiction.

Re:I anticipate trouble. (1)

RotateLeftByte (797477) | about 5 months ago | (#46940165)

The point is, they don't care. They sue/extort first and hope that they don't pick on someone with deep pockets who will sue the bejeezus out of them.
Just don't have any of that public domain music on any device you might take to the USA.

Re:I anticipate trouble. (1)

SuricouRaven (1897204) | about 5 months ago | (#46940247)

https://birds-are-nice.me/musi... [birds-are-nice.me]

If they try to sue me for that, I'll... back down without a fight, because I can't afford to spend my life's savings to stand up for my principles. But I will then tell everyone I can about the incident, including every internet rights organisation, and hope the backlash does some damage. Maybe one will even agree to pay the costs and handle the hassle for me.

No problem. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#46940329)

The content industry hasn't made a single thing I want to consume in a long time. I cut my cable back in 1998 and stopped watching TV all together at that point. At first I found it a little difficult to not just "flip on the TV" but after a while I didn't miss it at all. The content companies are running under the assumption that everybody wants what they offer. It's not right that when I bought CD-R's for backup purposes I was paying a tax to the music industry even though I don't listen to any music. Just because so many people listen to music.

Do artists benefit? (2)

X10 (186866) | about 5 months ago | (#46940371)

They would have a point if the money would go to the artists. But it doesn't.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?