[Kosh]

The bastards should walk the plank for this......


http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/02/25/loki_mpaa_million/

[Rictor]

How so?

The guy got charged 1 million dollars for running a website which everyone benefited from. So basically, he's stuck with a 1m fine for doing something for the common good. Whats wrong with using donations to pay off a part of that? I'm kind of sure he's not a millionare, so anyone who donated is just "paying his/her part" so to speak.

[Ashrak]

nah he didnt get fined ... he just asked for "donations" which he could keep himself ... so he essentially was given a deadline on shutting down the site whichhe followed and he made a hefty nickle from it too

[redmenace]

Didn't he also give away all the user logs as well.

[Ashrak]

yeah

[karajorma]

Originally posted by Rictor
How so?

Because he claimed he would fight against the MPAA and then turned around and capitulated with them. People who donated to his cause could actually sue him for fraud because he claimed that the money was going towards his court case and he never actually went to court.

[SadisticSid]

Apparently the user logs are worthless:

The MPAA’s press release is chilling. Not only has the money donated to the legal defence fund disappeared into a black hole, but all former registered users of LokiTorrent are placed at risk of future lawsuits.

However, registered users will be relieved to hear that very little, if any, useful information will end up in the hands of the MPAA.

“They don't have anything, they have air,” an ex-torrent site owner told Slyck. He chose to remain anonymous. For arguments sake, we will call him Paul.

Paul also ran a Torrent site based on the same scripts and source used by LokiTorrent. They conferred regularly.

Referring to the website logs:

“Those access logs have no value it all. They only display whether you downloaded the .torrent file, not if you actually downloaded the content using that Torrent,” Paul explained to Slyck.

The Torrent file is merely a key; the MPAA can not prove that it was used in any locks.

Paul went on, “We both didn't log [seed and leech] information because first it would allow us to know too much about the people using the network and what they were sharing. 2nd it would require huge resources to keep track of all that. That's the tracker's job.”

At best, the information could be used in conjunction with other research to target “serial uploaders”. Much like the RIAA target those who share more than a set number of music tracks, the MPAA can now target those who have a history of trading Torrent files, although such a system would rely on static IP addresses.

But Paul does not believe that there will be enough information even for this.

“Logs files tend to grow at a rate of 1GB per day on this kind of site. Most site owners … either disable logging or purge the logs every few days. So there's little to no information for them,” he explained. “Perhaps Loki [Webber’s alias] even disabled his logging completely recently because of the large influx of new users.”

LokiTorrent did kept track of which Torrents each user had uploaded, but the information was stored in the database by username, rather than IP address.

The MPAA will find even less information in the logs for the trackers, which were also run by LokiTorrent. Unlike the website, the trackers do know who is uploading and downloading the actual files.

“Me and Loki both used XBTT as our tracker software. For a fact, XBTT is volatile, meaning that if you shut it down the active user list is immediately purged from memory and is NOT stored on disk,” Paul explained.

“The only thing they do know is who uploaded a torrent, but uploading and seeding is completely different. Even then, that information is only available for a few days [at most],” he concluded.

The MPAA would be able to gather more usage statistics and IP addresses by monitoring public trackers themselves. The announcement that they have acquired a roadmap to those behind file sharing appears to be nothing short of a scare tactic.

Paul also had a few words in defense of Webber, who has been accused of selling out those who donated to his legal defense fund, only to settle out of court.

“People should not think he ran with the money because he lost. Victory is not the only outcome of a costly lawsuit,” he said. “The gag order is the weirdest thing, it seems that it's purely there to prevent him from telling the truth.”

From http://www.slyck.com/news.php?story=665

[mikhael]

Originally posted by karajorma


Because he claimed he would fight against the MPAA and then turned around and capitulated with them. People who donated to his cause could actually sue him for fraud because he claimed that the money was going towards his court case and he never actually went to court.

A rather neat trap, actually. By suing him, they are per force admitting to using the site, which makes them a target for the MPAA. Since this isn't a criminal investigation, 5th amendment protections don't apply. Sure, you can make the case that someone donated who never used LokiTorrents, but it would be an awful stretch.

Let's face it: the LT guy pulled this one off pretty damned well.

[Rictor]

Originally posted by karajorma


Because he claimed he would fight against the MPAA and then turned around and capitulated with them. People who donated to his cause could actually sue him for fraud because he claimed that the money was going towards his court case and he never actually went to court.

If much larger and more poweerful organizations like the EFF have so far failed to take on the MPAA and win, what makes you think that the guy who runs Lokitorrent would stand a chance. Capitulation is about the only viable option unless you either live outside of their jurisdiction, or have lots and lots of money to spend on a lengthy court case.

OK, granted, it was deception, but I'm inclined to forgive him because he doesn't personally profit from the deception, he's just not throwing the money away on what would be a suicide case, but instead used it to pay down part of the very hefty fine he has been stuck with so that others may enjoy free downloads. Or at least thats my understanding, from what I've read.

Yeah OK, he didn't turn out to be the hero fighting for the rights of the underdogs, but lets face it: these days, about the only heros in the p2p legal battle are the ones who can write blank checks.

[karajorma]

Then he shouldn't have claimed he was going to take them on should he?