Archive for the ‘Net Stuff’ Category

G.Skill Memory Breaks Overclocking World Record Once Again

Congratulations to the Russian legendary overclockers, Slamms and Smoke, from team “OCLAB.RU” on breaking the new SuperPI 32M world record. With incredible memory speed of DDR3 2,640MHz CL8, team OCLab.ru has achieved the fastest SuperPI 32M score of 4m 44.609s. This incredible record has been validated by the world’s most well-known overclocking community website,hwbot.org, and can be found here.


In addition, 8 out of the world’s current top 10 SuperPI 32M overclocking records validated by hwbot.org are achieved using G.SKILL’s extreme performance memory modules, this once again shows G.SKILL memory kits are built with superior quality, outstanding overclocking performance and optimum stability, as G.SKILL became the most ideal DDR3 memory choice for computer power-users and overclocking enthusiasts.

Google URL Takedown Requests Up 100% In a Month, Up 1137% On 2011

The massive wave of DMCA takedowns sent by rightsholders to Google in recent months is growing at an astonishing rate. During the past month the number of takedown requests received by the search giant doubled to almost 1.5 million URLs per week. To put that into perspective, exactly one year ago weekly URL takedowns numbered just 131,577 per week, an increase of 1,137%.

While many sites comply with DMCA-style takedown requests in order to maintain their Image is Loading....‘safe harbor’ status, sites such as The Pirate Bay routinely refuse to take anything down.

For a long time there was little that could be done to stop casual users from subsequently finding content on sites like TPB by using regular search engines such as Google. However, during the last couple of years a growing movement has sought to do just that, not just against sites like TPB, but against all domains, no matter what their copyright policies.

Although Google regularly posts takedown requests it receives to the Chilling Effects Clearinghouse, the scale of the issue had largely been hidden. That changed with the publication of the company’s Transparency Report earlier this year.

What that continually updated database shows today is a huge and increasing effort by rightsholders to have links to copyright content hidden from the prying eyes of Google searchers on a scale never seen before.

Last month we reported that Google had just received a record number of URL takedown requests in a seven day period. In the week starting July 9, Google was asked to take down 719,416 URLs, up from the previous weekly record of 609,800 set in June.

Following that article the bar was raised again during the week starting July 17. A total of 736,477 URLs were taken down, but two weeks later another huge batch would eclipse even this record.

In the week starting July 23, rightsholders asked for 1,107,659 URLs to be taken down, an increase of more than 50% on the previous weekly record. But amazingly even this record was about to be smashed.

# URLs in takedown requests per week

Image is Loading.....

During the week starting August 13, Google received takedown requests for 1,496,220 URLs, up 35% on the record set just two weeks earlier and a huge 1,137% increase over the 131,577 URL takedowns requested August 8 2011.

Google says that during the last four weeks it was asked by 1,825 copyright owners and 1,406 anti-piracy reporting organizations to remove 5,733,402 URLs across 32,545 domains, truly huge numbers which on recent trends look likely to increase.

While Google’s Transparency Report provides a much-valued window into the world of DMCA takedowns, it has also raised awareness among rightsholders. As can be seen from the graph above, takedown requests were fairly steady until May when the report was first published and now the stats have gone through the roof.

Finally, while the report highlights a serious business it still manages to entertain. A notice here (line 40) sent by Microsoft orders Google to takedown a URL linking to an infringing copy of Windows 7 – listed on Bing.

Another, which is possibly the most confusing so far, sees a woman asking Google to delist a mugshot of someone who isn’t her.

“This image contains my personal date of birth, height and weight but the name is incorrectly spelled and the picture is not me,” she writes.

“The registered owner of the site is Mr. Watson PO Box 1571 Clarksburg Wv. As you know Mr. Watson is Sherlock Holmes fictitious sidekick and Clarksburg Wv is the home to the FBI. Something is suspicious with this site and it’s owner,” she concludes.

In a sign that Google doesn’t always comply with takedowns, the mugshot of someone who isn’t the person requesting the takedown (and presumably didn’t take the picture) remains intact.

Source

Anti-Piracy Law Firm Will Publicly Humiliate The Clergy, Police & Arabs

A German law firm will hit a new low next week, even for companies engaged in the file-sharing settlement letter business. The company says that from September 1st it will begin publishing the details of individuals it claims have infringed their clients’ copyrights by sharing hardcore pornography online. To make matters worse, they’re threatening to target churches, police stations and Arabs first. Neither the Pirate Party nor Anonymous are happy and now the latter are threatening action of their own.

When the RIAA embarked on its file-sharing settlement letter campaign last decade it unwittingly created a monster. Although the music industry group discontinued its actions in this field some time ago, dozens of other companies – notably in the porn business – followed in their footsteps.

The exact figures aren’t clear, but several hundred thousands individuals have been pursued for cash settlements for file-sharing in the United States and around Europe the problem is even worse. Germany has been hit by the trolls particularly hard, and it is from there that a new horror story is developing.

In a statement on its website the Urmann law firm explains that a large number of the file-sharing cases it is involved in end in settlements, a situation that is “often more useful than going through the courts.”

However, the company says that if necessary it will go to court to get justice for its clients, but there are things it can do to persuade stubborn individuals to pay up instead of having a hearing.

Starting September 1st, Urmann says it will begin publishing the personal details of Internet account holders it claims have violated their clients’ copyrights. The exact number is unknown, but Urmann previously claimed to have the identities of 150,000 individuals.

According to comments made by the law firm to Der Spiegel, the bulk of the firm’s clients aren’t record label owners either – they’re sellers of German hardcore pornography.

But the worst is yet to come. According to comments an Urmann insider made to Wochenblatt, the law firm is planning to target the most vulnerable people first – those with IP addresses registered to churches, police stations and – quite unbelievably – the embassies of Arab countries.

Urmann insists that it is completely entitled to take this action because the law is on its side. The company is leaning on a 2007 Federal Constitutional Court ruling that deemed it legal for law firms to publish the names of their clients’ opponents in order to advertise their services. However, there is some debate if the ruling applies since it was targeted at commercial opponents, not regular citizens.

Bernd Schlömer of the German Pirate Party describes the law firm’s threats to undermine the privacy rights of individuals as “shocking” and says that Urmann’s actions could be construed as “legal coercion.”

Perhaps not surprisingly, the loose-knit activist collective Anonymous are also unhappy and are hinting at action of their own.

“A law firm has announced that shortly it will publish a so-called enemies list on the web,” the group said in an announcement.

“Once the list of Urmann and colleagues is online, we will take care of it!”

Urmann courted controversy last year when it started an auction to sell the unpaid settlements of 70,000 alleged file-sharers to the highest bidder.

Police Warn Internet Users Not To Pay Fines To File-Sharing Fraudsters

Police in Sweden are warning Internet users not to send money to criminals trying to extort money from alleged file-sharers. The sophisticated scam began when unsuspecting cell phone users browsed an infected website which somehow extracted information from their devices. This was followed up by a mailed allegation of copyright infringement and a cash demand for between 90 and 195 euros to be paid into a foreign bank account. Swedish Antipiratbyran say the scheme is nothing to do with them.

n many countries around the world, especially the United States, Germany and the UK, hundreds of thousands of Internet users have received letters from rightsholders demanding cash settlements to make supposed copyright lawsuits go away. The cases rarely end up in court, leading some to label these schemes “legal blackmail”.

Nevertheless, and erroneous accusations aside, the vast majority of these projects operate within the law, which is more than can be said for a new scam currently hitting Sweden. Unsuspecting Internet users are receiving demands for almost two hundred euros in letters that claim they have been engaged in illegal downloading.

At this early stage it is not exactly clear how the scam operates, but it is believed that Internet users browsed a website set up by criminals which had the ability to gather information from their phones.

After visiting the site, victims reported receiving an SMS followed up by a mailed cash demand from Arcad World Corp., a company registered at a post office box in Stockholm.

“You have downloaded copyrighted porn. Soon you will receive a civil claim. We ask you to pay it so that your illegal activity will not be a police matter. According to Swedish law, it is your duty to find out if the movies can be downloaded or not,” the scammers explain.

Victims are then told to send amounts between 90 and 195 euros to an account held at the Valartis Bank in Liechtenstein.

When action against illegal downloading is mentioned in Sweden, the name that often springs to mind is the infamous Antipiratbyran. That image was only reinforced when the scammers included a link to an Antipiratbyran webpage in their scam mails. The group says it has absolutely nothing to do with the letters.

“We have been approached by some 100 people across the country, consumer groups and others who are wondering what this is all about,” says Sara Lindbäck, a copyright lawyer at Antipiratbyrån.

Antipiratbyran’s advice is for letter recipients to inform the police and certainly not pay. In an announcement last evening the police said they are aware of the scheme.

“This is a new type of scam where the sender wants to intimidate the recipient into paying money. Anyone who receives one of these requests should absolutely not pay any money but should instead contact the police,” said Niclas Linér, Detective in cybercrime group at the Police Authority in Västmanland.

Police say that a person resident in southern Sweden is suspected of fraud.

Source

Leaked Report Reveals Music Industry’s Global Anti-Piracy Strategy

A confidential internal report of the music industry outfit IFPI has been inadvertently made available online by the group itself. Penned by their Head of Internet Anti-piracy Operations, the report details the global strategy for the major recording labels of IFPI. Issues covered include everything from torrent sites to cyberlockers, what behavior IFPI expects of Internet service providers, the effectiveness of site blocking, and how pirates are accessing unreleased music from industry sources.

Dated April 2012, the IFPI report obtained by us was put together by the music Image is Loading.....industry group’s chief anti-piracy officer Mo Ali.

The 30-page report presents a global view of IFPI’s “problems”, “current and future threats” and the industry’s responses to them.

IFPI says it has five possible reactions to a threat: Take down, Disruption, Investigation, Lobbying and Litigation.

The Threats: P2P

Initially IFPI splits illicit content availability into two sections. The first they classify as “content held on users’ computers” and distributed via P2P networks such as BitTorrent, Gnutella, DirectConnect, eDonkey and Ares.

It says it has taken “strategic action” against The Pirate Bay (BitTorrent), LimeWire (Gnutella) and also the semi-private tracker Demonoid (BitTorrent). IFPI doesn’t elaborate on action against the latter, but it was rumored that a member of the site’s staff was targeted a while back.

Central hosting/cyberlockers

The second category is content held on central servers, including file-hosts and cyberlockers. Interestingly, the IFPI diagram below shows that when the group examined allegedly infringing URLs on the world’s major cyberlockers, Megaupload’s stats paled into insignificance when compared to the others.

Image is Loading.....
IFPI is clear on their requirements for cyberlockers to operate to their liking. Their number one desire is that they “proactively filter for infringing content” but if they don’t they must “operate an effective and efficient notice and take down system.” Failure to implement either means sites will be required to “shut down”.

Hacking and phishing attacks

One of the other threats detailed by IFPI include hacking and phishing attacks against email accounts of artists and their management. Through these techniques individuals are apparently obtaining unauthorized access to pre-release music.

IFPI say a number of techniques are being used, from bogus emails claiming to be from social networking, email, or cyberlocker sites, to the compromising of password reset features. Once accessed, mail is forwarded to other accounts, either with the music attached or with valuable information which allows other systems to be accessed.

The rise of mobile data and applications

IFPI is also keeping a close eye on the downloading and sharing of content across mobile data and other wireless networks. IFPI worries that these networks are providing here-and-now streaming of content via all-you-can-eat plans. Making matters worse is that IFPI reports “challenges” when it comes to matching an IP address to a subscriber.

The recording group also reports that Apple and Android architectures are encouraging the creation of 3rd party music apps. IFPI say they are crawling both the App Store and Google Marketplace and are focusing on “quick take down agreements” with Apple, Google, Microsoft, Nokia and Palm to remove apps they don’t like. They are also mulling an expansion of their “payment provider program” to target “rogue” Android app developers.

Unauthorized pay MP3 sites

IFPI say they have identified in excess of 50 Russian and Ukrainian pay MP3 download sites. The group reports that law enforcement authorities have “secured evidence that the illegal sites are annually stealing hundreds of millions of dollars” which is creating opportunities for money laundering and tax evasion investigations. IFPI say their next steps will include strangling the sites’ finances with the help of payment processors, recovering proceeds of crime, and developing asset confiscation.

Advertisers and payment processors

IFPI’s advertiser strategy is based around the “disruption of revenue streams” to unauthorized sites by several methods. In the report they speak of a “structured notice and take down programme targeting Google’s AdSense and DoubleClick advertising networks,” plus “out reach” to IASH and IAB to implement “comprehensive infringing block lists.” IFPI says it also initiates direct contact with advertisers to flag when their ads appear on infringing sites.

Agreements are said to be in place with VISA, MasterCard, PayPal, CTIA, Monitise, PaySafeCard and PhonePayPlus to strangle finances to unauthorized sites.

Dealing with Internet service providers

In common with cyberlockers, IFPI have a set of rules they’d like to impose on Internet service providers. According to the industry group, ISPs should not provide Internet access to infringing sites, services or even unidentified customers. Furthermore, ISPs are required to “Implement a system of graduated response for infringing P2P users including warnings to an effective deterrent sanction.”

Site Blocking

ISPs are also required by IFPI to block access to infringing sites and services “located outside the local jurisdiction.” The chart below shows where blocking orders have been obtained (prior to April 2012) and how they are carried out.

Image is Loading.....
Surprisingly, despite reports mounting to the contrary, IFPI seems to think that site blocking is an almost perfect solution to counter infringement.

“The effectiveness of such a ‘block’ will depend on the determination of the ISP subscriber
and the content/website provider to maintain access to each other and to use circumvention techniques to bypass blocking techniques,” they write.

“There is evidence to suggest that there is limited (between 3% and 5%) adoption of these circumvention techniques although subscribers with more technical knowledge could look to circumvent ISP controls using virtual private networks (VPN) or anonymous proxies.”

Conclusions

IFPI finishes up by stressing the importance of “co-operation, partnerships and information exchange” and the building of relationships with law enforcement, judges and legal bodies in order to “provide training built around ‘real world’ experiences and challenges rather than focusing on theory.”

Image is Loading.....
Amendments to relevant laws need to be planned for the future, but in the short term IFPI should “consider ‘quick, curve ball’ solutions to impact more complex operations as
complement to long term investigations,” the group concludes.