I spent some time at a university and got to field DMCA complaints. Typically they'd list the file getting shared and a timestamp (often without a timezone) and the university IP/port. They never included their own IP address...<p>Of course, the traffic was behind a firewall. I had the logs but wasn't about to accuse / punish anyone when there were a bunch of potential students behind any given complaint, and without the other end of the connection I couldn't identify which one for certain.<p>Funny thing is they refused to give their source IP because they didn't trust us to not leak it to whatever pirates to put on a blocklist.<p>But of course, I had their source IP because I had the network traffic. Were I in kahoots I'd have just listed all 5 of the possible snitching peers to the badguys.<p>Shady and incompetent then, same now I guess.
Prenda Law used a similar tactic when they uploaded films to pirate bay and then sued anyone who downloaded them.<p>You can bet if Schneider loses the case, she'll be left holding the bag as Virgin Islands-based Pirate Monitor Ltd disappears.<p>Creative folks who hire these law firms that specialize in pirate hunters or "monitoring" companies need to realize they have incentives to pirate your content to keep your business. And when you sue people off information they provided you, it's your name on the lawsuit. Sure you can try to sue the companies after you lose, but good luck with that.
This reminds me of something hilarious happening on Twitch that I recently learned from younger relatives.<p>There are normal people on the game ‘Among Us’ playing copyrighted music into their mic, so that if a celebrity Twitch streamer gets too close to this individual there is a chance their account would get banned due to the DMCA.<p>They are using DMCA as an in-game defensive aurora. Ha
Youtube is some kind of madman playground. I have created YT channel for my daughter's cello teacher, where I uploaded Dmitri Shostakovich "Prelude" played by them.<p>A few moments later I've received information that this piece is "demonetized" (I wasn't even trying to monetize it) because part of this "song" is a copy of some other "song" owned by someone else. That other "song" was in no way related to the Prelude besides it was also played on two cellos.<p>I've started some "dispute" process not because I am planning to earn money on this channel, but to somehow stop that idiocy that YT keeps pushing.<p>If Google is using the same "AI" that was used to compare those movies for the purpose of matching ads with those who does not use ad block, I am really sorry for advertisers, who are paying money for this.
Will be interesting to see how this pans out. A similar ploy was committed by the infamous Prenda Law firm, resulting in their eventual imprisonment:<p><a href="https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2019/07/prenda-law-porn-troll-saga-ends-with-prison-for-founder/" rel="nofollow">https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2019/07/prenda-law-porn-...</a>
When an agent acting on behalf of an IP holder uploads that IP anywhere it should be legally construed as granting an implicit license to use that IP within the context of that upload.
> According to the Google-owned platform, the same IP address used to upload 'pirate' movies to the platform also sent DMCA notices targeting the same batch of content.<p>Could be CGNAT? (I mean, it probably isn't, but IPv4 exhaustion is real!)
> one of the ‘RansomNova’ users that had been uploading clips via IP addresses in Pakistan logged into their YouTube account from a computer connected to the Internet via an IP address in Hungary<p>Can someone parse this for me?<p>Edit: A RansomNovaX-account was usually accessed from Pakistan ip. Then it was accessed from Hungarian ip.<p>I kept trying to read it as "users that had been (uploading clips via IP addresses in Pakistan [while] logged into their YouTube account from a computer) connected to the Internet via an IP address in Hungary"
There are multiple good reasons to enable wifi guest network from home. It is nice thing to do; like in case someone gets in a car accident nearby and doesn't have cell coverage/service.<p>I have mine throttled and they can't access the rest of home network.<p>Having a guest network also means you are not liable if someone misuses it:<p><a href="https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2011/08/open-wifi-and-copyright-liability-setting-record#:~:text=The%20truth%20is%20that%20no,with%20neighbors%20and%20passers%20by" rel="nofollow">https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2011/08/open-wifi-and-copyrigh...</a>.
Genuine question: How exactly do you get access to Content ID? Is there some kind of regular process or do you need to have a special partnership with Google?
Fun fact: The artist in question has been dead since 2011. The wording of the article, more specifically when it says:<p>> Grammy award-winning musician Maria Schneider and Virgin Islands-based Pirate Monitor Ltd teamed up in the summer to file a class-action lawsuit against YouTube.<p>It somehow led me to believe that the artist was being ... not nice, shall we say. But it turns out it's just the company then. Huh.
Sort of off topic but this story is probably the only time we’ll see Maria on the front page of HN:<p>I just want to point out that she’s a wonderful composer, and if you aren’t familiar you should check her out. (I wish she’d make it easier to do so though - if she’s going to work so hard to keep her music off digital platforms it would be nice if she’d release her albums on vinyl!)
I guess we sort of need a p2p content sharing platform that uses some kind of technology to make things like DMCA's impossible or irrelevant.<p>We are at a point where laws are hindrance and nuisance.
What does "accessing content ID" mean? The article says they did all that to gain that access, but doesn't mention what is it or what do they gain by it.
I wonder if this means "double jepoardy" is in play: once youtube gets this easily-dismissed lawsuit cleared away, no one can sue youtube again about state of DMCA takedowns on the site.