RIAA aims lawyers at usenet newsgroup service

This is different...

Running a NNTP server requires you to *CHOOSE* which groups to receive. There was a concious choice by management or sysadmins at some point to include the alt.binaries.* leaf nodes

I am surprised they didn't go after usenext seeing it's much more visible and is associated with a lot of the p2p sites.

Wait a minute...

<quote> claiming that the Fargo, North Dakota newsgroup service "enables and encourages" people to swap copyrighted music. </quote>

Hold on...Please tell me I mis-read that sentence.

Does this mean they will go after every Joe Average man-on-the street because his computer is equipped with a floppy drive, USB or CD-R?

Just because you have equipment which *enables* you to do something, does that mean your a criminal?

I might have to report every female on the planet, because they have the equipment that enables her to commit prostitution, or every male because he has the equipment that enables him to commit rape.

When will these Judges, pollies & ISP's stand up to this schoolyard bully and tell them that they should not be treating their customers like they are pirates.

Don't get me wrong, I believe that stealing someone's property is wrong, but they are no better. They just take lots of money from the customer, and give a small percentage to the artist. Who is the pirate?

No more purchases

Nearly all of my CD purchases in the last 12 years have been based on music I found on the Internet. The radio stations around here are useless for finding new music because they don't dare play anything more than the industry singles.

Now I won't be able to find new music on Usenet, P2P, or the radio. That leaves me with nothing but a 20 second sound bite, the cover art, and maybe a garble-fi YouTube video as tools to find new music. I need more convincing than that, especially when every music purchase feels like giving money to a criminal organization.

I'll rip all my older CD into iTunes for another listen. I need something to listen to until the music industry's suicide is complete.

i'm in ur usenet

Weak.

I've long wondered how the RIAA would try and go after usenet. I suppose it's too much to hope for that the recording industry will collapse before these suits result in widespread abandonment of binaries groups.

RIAA hurts sales

I've not purchased anything from a member company of the RIAA for a couple of years now. Know what? Haven't missed it a bit. All the good stuff is mostly by independents and the like anyway. The more they sue people, the harder I look at exactly what I'm buying and who I'm supporting when I do.

It's about time their member companies realized that the actions of the RIAA are hurting them more than helping them. Unfortunately, I think they've lost track of their real purpose, which is to sell more music. It isn't to alienate as many of their potential customers as possible. They've forgotten that the RIAA member companies are NOT the only choice for music out there.

Whats Next?

FTP? Telnet? Gopher?

Maybe the RIAA needs to shut down the Internet completely because they will never stop file swapping.

Will they...

...sue Microsoft, Apple or Linux developers (or any other OS manufacturer) since it's these OS's that the MP3s are played on?

@Adam Williamson / NNTP

"let's face it, if NNTP had been intended as a file transfer protocol, it would've handled 8-bit encodings"

Better stop using POP3 and SMTP then. No more e-mail attachments for you.

@Adam Williamson

I presume you feel the same way about transferring files by email, as SMTP isn't designed for file transfer and doesn't handle 8 bit encodings...

@Andrew Tyler

yes the binary groups are still largly posted as ascii

each file is normally cut up into ~50mb chuncks which are then again spilt into 50+ ascii posts

as for the not straight forward method of downloading there are apps like newsleecher that will do all the file merging and downloading for you

But...

Beyond the rights and wrongs of file-sharing, however, are we really prepared to have private companies and their lobby groups shut down our channels of communication? Binaries are a big part of Usenet, but more than most other systems that CAN be used for file-sharing, Usenet is used for the LEGITIMATE transfer of information (including binaries). It starts to look like authoritarian censorship after a while - for commercial gain.

However, unlike P2P, Usenet as a system has some money behind it, and can probably put up a decent legal fight. It's also highly distributed, so hard to shut down if source-servers are simply moved abroad. So I think the RIAA has bitten off more than it can chew this time. We'd better hope so anyway. If they can shut down any system that CAN carry infringing material (and they show every sign of intending to do so) , then say goodbye to the information society.

Much as I hate to...

...side with the bottom feeding scum, I feel in this case they have some point. From usenet.com:

"Shh... Quiet! We believe it’s no one’s business but your own what you do on the Internet or in Usenet. We don't track user activity."

"Don't forget that with Usenet.com, you get:

[...snip...] Free movies, pictures, software, music, games, and much more"

And that's today. From what I remembered, when someone showed me the sight a while back it was covered with references to "gigabytes of free MP3's" and "thousands of movies". It would appear that they've toned down their site (I can't check the Wayback machine, because it doensn't archive usenet.com).

If you're building a business on letting people make illegal downloads then you should at least have the balls to admit it. How many people would PAY for a usenet service if they weren't downloading MP3's or questionable porn from the binaries groups? If there are any people that pay for usenet.com's service that DONT use it for illegal downloads, then they are definitely a minority and not the people that usenet.com are aiming their marketing at.

On the other hand, how RIAA can claim "damages" from someone distributing for free a product that RIAA willingly give away free (on the radio and through libraries) just seems bizzarre. Sharing MP3's may be ethically wrong, but I believe the RIAA (and similar organisations in other nations) vastly overstate the damage done by fans of music exchanging music. Remember:

"Home taping is killing music" - no it didn't

"CD Burners will kill music" - No they didn't

"MP3's killed the radio star" - No they won't.

I for one have bought CD's and gone to concerts to see bands that I wouldn't have found out about if someone handn't given me a tape, CD or MP3 of for free. It's called marketting.

So I guess my point is that usenet.com are merely profiting from a market that RIAA have created by their asinine insistance on sueing their customers. Ironic?

Right, they've lost my money

Ok, this has been going on too long, and I'm sick of that immature industry trying to stay in the loop and playing gung-ho to get there.

I'm going to stick to my torrents and everything, and will only purchase music if it's offered directly from the artist (aka Radiohead).

This will likely mean I will stop downloading/buying new music for a while as I would not want to cheat artists out of money.

I gave up on CDs in 1999 at the age of 16 when I fell in love with the flexibility of mp3s. It was my equivalent of your tape-deck mixing/first CDs/first LPs - a real watershed moment.

I've now been waiting 8 years for someone/anyone to take advantage of this medium to get me music. It's been technically possible since that time but the only providers have been illegal.

As no-one's taking any initiative, I will penalise them back. No money spent on music until further notice.

Here we go again

I'm surprise the Chief Vulture enabled comments on this one as its blatantly going to go round the same "RIAA scumbags" vs "Thieving freeloaders" loop as all the others.

In this case, couldn't Usenet.com, EasyNews, Usenext and others just pay a levy to the RIAA, which they could pass on as a small increase in their currently quite low subscription rates?

@Craig Foster: Isn't Usenext based in Germany? Which would make them a harder target.

It's about time these criminals were brought to justice.

Unfortunately, it's unlikely that the Us "Justice" system will convict the members of the Recording Arse the same way they would another crime syndicate.

Ah, well, looks like I'll only be buying albums by Radiohead, Marillion and those available through the likes of Bleep in future.

weren't they asking for it?

Obviously if usenet.com promote their service as a file download service, and also promote a news leecher on their front page they are going to attract attention. Most providers I know just sell newsgroup access - not "2 million new files every day!".

@ Andrew Tyler: Downloading from newsgroups has become much easier indeed. NZB files are one first thing that helps, and there are countless leecher apps. You no longer need to browse newsgroups basically. Browsing newsgroups is actually probably more difficult now.

FYI

http://www.binaries4all.com/beginners/

If you guys want to get yourselves a bit familiar with the whole binary posting process.

I am a regular user of the usenet, and I can tell you, piracy is rampant there. But I doubt the RIAA will get anything out of this.

binary newsgroups

Andrew:

You're right, technically there's no difference between binary newsgroups & any others. The distinction is in what the users of the group choose to allow (particularly if the group is 'chartered', which usenet sysadmins will generally enforce to some extent upon request) and in the way the host decides to handle spooling and turnover.

Text qua text takes up very little storage space, and so a discussion group might reasonably expect that their provider can store the entire history of the group, or at least a very extensive chunk of the ongoing discussion. Binary groups, on the other hand, take up an enormous amount of storage space; no host can manage to store all of that content for long, and so each provider will determine what binary 'retention' they can manage to provide -- anything from a day or two up to a couple of months.

This sort of purpose-driven retention policy is much easier to implement if the binary groups follow a well-defined nomenclature -- hence the alt.binaries.* standard.

As for the mechanics of posting or receiving binary files: yeah, it's mostly the same as it's ever been (with a few technical innovationshhhhhhhhhhh such as yEnc) but advances in both server-side and client-side implementation have made the process much more transparent to the end user.

Joshua Englehart

Saratoga, CA

nntp & smtp

Isn't NNTP a spin off from SMTP arn't they very similar to each other? both client & Server host based etc??

How long before hotmail/yahoo/[Mail provider of choice] is fingered for facilitating copying of digital files? 'you mean the files were stored on thier servers?'

I'm of to mail my audio files to myself, via a mail provider I dont like...

PS where the Ass of America Icon?

sad sad sad

"next thing you know they will be going after BBS. Better erase all those 5.25 floppies and whats the command to format RLL hard drive ??"

g-c800:5

I'll get my coat...

@Daniel

Daniel : "Of course, even if they were cherry picking groups, it still wouldn't reduce their DMCA protection one bit - any more than it would reduce the DMCA protection of a website with chat forums that were created with titles chosen by the site, but otherwise left open for the users to post and read as they liked. So, it looks like your argument is flawed coming and going."

I don't think a judge will accept that simplified argument. If I choose to mirror (unadulterated) a specific thread or section of a forum whose sole purpose is distribution of illegal music, then I have overstepped the protection of the DMCA. If I blanket mirrored the whole original forum site (without applying any filtering or manual alteration on my part) then the DMCA stands. DMCA requires you to not interfere with the traffic - once you do you're "able to filter" and then become responsible for it's remaining content.

Utterly unenforcable

This is pointless, usenet.com only host a copy of what thousands upon thousands of other NNTP hosts do.

Plus the groups do contain LEGAL stuff you know, the best they can do is force usenet.com to filter their feeds. Which will cost a fortune, and the second its attempted every single customer will move to another provider. And so the dance continues, the only ones loving all this is the lawyers.

If the RIAA think they can shut the Usenet network down like they did Kazaa they are in for a fucking shock.

It'd be like shutting down the internet one ISP at a time.

This just in...

...RIAA executives found on beach waving legal papers at tide; tide refuses to comply. RIAA declared "bunch of Cnuts".

lol

I've been using giganews for years, and recently they upped their retention to 100 days and offer 256bit SSL encryption... best newshost ever!!

How are they going to go after http based portals then like easynews? Should be fun to see how the RIAA gets wrapped up in this one... how many lies are thrown out in court, how many customers they intend to prosecute, and how many laws they are willing to break in their quest, for example making companies hosting this stuff have to go against their stated privacy policies.

Fun times indeed! :)

I keep a loaded 9mm Beretta in my car, can I be arrested for posessing murder technology?

Ok, so I (legally here in Arizona in the USofA) keep a 9mm Beretta with a laser sight in the center console of my car. It has a magazine in it with 15 rounds. I keep a second magazine in the center console with another 15 rounds.

So based on having the enabling technology of murder, can I be arrested because I had the ability to murder 30 people? Sounds like that's what Smell My Finger above would argue.

@ Smell My Finger

"most of the alt.binaries groups really only have an illegitimate purpose."

OReally? So I suppose the various governments of the world should lock up everyone employed in manufacturing or transporting explosives, firearms, armored fighting vehicles, military aircraft, kitchen knives, flammable liquids (like kerosene, petrol, and aviation fuel), volatile solvents, rat poison, nitrogen fertilizer, plastics, cell phones, radio transmitters and receivers, copper wire, wet- and dry-cell batteries, and every other trapping of civilisation.

This may come as a shock to you, StinkyFinger, but legitimate purposes for various and sundry things are *not* limited to what your subcretinous alleged intelligence can imagine.

In other words, the fact that you're too stupid to think of a legitimate purpose does not prevent that purpose from springing into existence - as they all have, most of them before you were old enough to soil your nappies.

Now go back and report to your owners at the RIAA that you have failed, once again, to make thinking people stop thinking.

Re:LOL

@law

Giganews went to 100days early this year, its steadily increased to 200days now.

[rant]

There really needs to be a concerted coordination to boycott the RIAA, with some half decent coverage and promotion. Hit the RIAA's little members right where it hurts in the wallet and image to the point where the RIAA lashback costs them far more than any *perceived* loss from sharing.

History has shown that the music industry wasn't 'killed' by previous technology and won't be 'killed' by this one and its time to say enough is enough.

[/rant]

RIAA to sue Dictionaries

The RIAA has just announced that it is to smack huge lawsuits on many of the world's largest dictionaries as 'word of mouth' encourages music sharing. One of the most common ways in which copyrighted music is distributed occurs through one person 'telling' another person about the music using 'words'. This 'communication' will then directly lead to one person giving a copy of a song, or 'track' as the kids call them, to another.

"Without words, there would be almost no illegal music sharing." Said an RIAA spokesperson. "We therefore feel that the world's dictionaries should be forced to change their behaviour so as to limit the use of words, or to redefine words to make their use less ambiguous. For example, the entry for 'share' will be altered to say 'to illegally copy music', the word 'pirate' will change to 'someone who wants terrorists and drugs dealers to kill your children'.

And if this doesn't stop the illegal file sharing, then an even more extreme series of law cases could begin. An RIAA insider has leaked a memo suggestions that the next target could be the Universe itself. "If the Universe didn't have the fundamental physical properties it does" says this memo "then file sharing would be physically impossible. If the Universe were to change its laws of physics, then the music industry would be protected from all forms of copyright infringement."

An RIAA spokesperson denies this claim, but tells us that. "The RIAA is looking at targeting Evolutionary Theory as the human ear provides a direct route for the sharing of music files, however, we have so far been unable to find an Amercian jury which will accept that God did not create humans 6000 years ago. And whose going to win a court case against God?"

I cannot tell a lie

I (sob) downloaded a copyrighted file from usenet.

I wish to appear in court to allow myself to be judged. (Oh, the shame).

I ask no more than my fellow conspirators stand alongside me in the dock - chief amongst them being Sony.

They not only allowed me to burn this file on a DVD with their name on it, but I am also able to watch it on a TV produced by them.

How I wish they had not placed such temptation in my path.

RIAA Faggots

Soon the Indie scene will overtake the Corporate-controlled cookie-cutter Pop garbage flooding the market today and the RIAA will die with it (and hopefully MTV & VH1). The RIAA are not musicians or Record Producers, but they are the leeches in between that steal monies and rights from the artists as well as the public.. Kind of like Sports Agents..

Uunet pre-dates the Internet

Usenet and it's predecessor uunet (not the ex-ISP) existed before the Internet as we know it (and even ARPANET).

Back in the days of modems, there was a network (topoligical net, not physical connections) of UNIX systems which regularly dialed each other up via telephone lines with UUCP (UNIX-to-UNIX Copy Protocol). This was used to exchange mail and newsgroups. This is where sendmail and nntpd came from. It was used extensively by educational users of UNIX to post mods to the UNIX source code (which was available at media distribution costs to University and Collages for non-commercial and non-teaching purposes). My word. How history repeats itself! Bit like Linux then, but a smaller community.

For those who remember it, mail addressing used to look something like (and I mean something, because my memory is shot) user!host1!host2@host3, where you would specify the complete set of hops to get to the destination system. This was fortunatly simplified by smart hosts like ihlpa (an AT&T run system in Indian Hill, Chicago) and others that used to act as mail routers. It is only recently (last 8 years?) that source-routing of mails was blocked by the default sendmail setup. Email and newsgroup posts often took hours or days to get to their destinations, depending on the polling interval of the systems in the path.

Ancient history now, but interesting.

I'll get my coat for being a sad geek.

I must preview my comments

UUCP - UNIX to UNIX Copy Program. Damn, damn.