Spotted on: ArsTechnica
Before I break down the long and short of this issue, I want to bring your attention to something.
Companies like Media Defender are not protecting copyright and content interests. They are actually encouraging people not to buy content. The more intrusively and forcefully companies like Media Defender attempt to control our content consumption, the more the general public will revolt. If companies want to protect their revenue, the way is to embrace p2p culture, not to subvert it.
On to the details:
MediaDefender is in the business of protecting content from piiracy. Specifically, they seek
out and protect content on peer to peer networks. They use a variety or sneaky tactics, including decoy files, to catch people who are downloading music.
Here’s how they describe their services on their site: “MediaDefender uses a range of non-invasive technological countermeasures employed on P2P networks to frustrate users’ attempts to steal/trade copyrighted content…Decoying and Spoofing are the most commonly known techniques that we employ. We send blank files and data noise that look exactly like a real response to an initiated search requests for a particular title…”
Oddly enough, they also offer service to seed content onto peer to peer networks. From the Media Defender site: “Peer-to-Peer* Marketing is when we capture live search requests from your targeted demographic and respond with your clients’ files”
In other words, not only are they hunting down file sharers, they are using the data they obtain for marketing purposes. This would be like the TSA using travel information to provide us with travel discounts and promotions.
Recently, a huge amount of internal corporate documents were leaked to the public through (insert dramatic irony) Bit Torrent. The documents were obtained by a group called MediaDefender-Defenders
It appears that Media Defender has been running a secret site where uploaded files can be tracked – without any permission. I believe the legal term for this kinf od action is entrapment. I find it amusing that the same file sharing networks that are being manipulated by companies like Media Defender are being subverting for the uses of major media conglomerates by companies including Media Defender.
Even better, according to the documents, Major record companies and movie studios were paying Media Defender to protect their albums from file sharing (and for a hefty fee, too). As if it wasn;t sketchy enough, the documents show that Media Defender actively sought to divert p2p traffic to their own p2 website (the now defunct Miivi.com), so they could catch people in the act of downloading. This kind of action is similar to sending a drug dealer door to door, and then arresting people who buy something.
As if all of this isn’t embarassing enough for Media Defender, executives of the company insisted in July that “MediaDefender was working on an internal project that involved video and didn’t realize that people would be trying to go to it and so we didn’t password-protect the site” (source- ArsTechnica).
I can understand that compaines like Media Defender can make a great living out of protecting content. As a label owner, I can even understand the desire to want to sell units. However, Media Defender is denying they intentionally attempted to entrap users (can you say liar?) . And if that isn’t enough, they are using the same information to create marketing strategies.
In spite of the fact that people can get any media they want for free, records still sell. Album sales may be dropping like hailstones, but record sales continue to be a multi-billion dollar industry.
Consumers have the power now, and we get to say what has value, not corporations.
Loading ...
MD used what’s known in the InfoSec industry as a ‘honey pot’. They used these ‘fake’ trackers to gather intel on the biggest seeders, etc. It wasn’t to entrap them (Ars Technica should have known better) per se, but to monitor them, collect vital data such as IP Address, and use the info to build a bigger case later that the RIAA, et al might want to use as an actionable law suit.
However, the real issue at hand is that its a losing War. A cat and mouse game they don’t have the brains or the brawn to ever win. The real cause and effect piracy takes place in countries like China. Where printed, pirated discs of every Hollywood Movie, Major Software, or Music Album can be purchased for pennies on the dollar. Even Microsoft acknowledged this, and started selling limited versions of Windows in high-piracy countries for the equivalent of $5 USD. Still about $4 more than a pirated copy, but they figured a small slice of pie is better than no pie at all.
If MD and their clients were smarter, they’d realize that its a losing proposition to make criminals of their consumers. Go after the people that make money from it sure, but the people downloading the latest blockbuster were never going to pay for it in the first place.