**Embedding (NOT hosting) Copyrighted Video is Grounds for ICE Domain Seizure!**

[Kludge]

"...

I'll be looking into more detail on all of these sites (many of which have already set up shop under different domain names) to get a better understanding, but after my initial review of Channelsurfing.net, a Swedish site, there are really serious questions raised. That's because Channelsurfing -- a site based in Sweden -- does not appear to host any content, nor link to any downloadable content. Instead, it was built entirely of embeds of streaming video offerings from elsewhere on the internet (and the site was known to obey takedown requests). Nearly four years ago, we questioned whether merely embedding videos could be copyright infringement.

While we haven't yet seen the affidavit ICE used this time around, if the affidavit used last time is any indication, ICE agents claim that these sites are involved in direct infringement of copyright for criminal purposes. We've already noted that there is no such thing as criminal contributory infringement right now, so "direct" infringement is the only real option for ICE.

And that's a big problem for ICE.

..."

Full story @ http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110202/01203012918/homeland-security-domain-seizures-raise-more-questions-is-embedding-video-criminal-infringement.shtml

Think about the implications of this and understand that ICE has created precedence to continue shutting down sites like that, and eventually move on to shutting down sites like RPFs or at least require all content have admin approval per review before posted to the public. This shit needs to stop. Now.

[awake]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N2bCc0EGP6U

[sailingaway]

Does that mean if we link a youtube on the film option for this site, we put Brian and Josh at risk? Should we just post the link, instead of putting it on so it 'appears'?

[specsaregood]

Think about the implications of this and understand that ICE has created precedence to continue shutting down sites like that, and eventually move on to shutting down sites like RPFs or at least require all content have admin approval per review before posted to the public. This shit needs to stop. Now.

I'm all for the slippery-slope argument, but lets be real. Those sites, while not "hosting" are setup with the SOLE INTENT of making it easy to find pirated materials. And they profit off of it with their ads. Did they have streamlinks for anything that wasn't pirated?

[silverhandorder]

This intellectual property battle is reaching it's conclusion. Technology can not easily bypass IP protections. Seizing sites is a last ditch effort and it will go nowhere. There are thousands of sites that are linking to pirated material. Shut one down people will just go to another.

Lastly soon Creative Commons infrastructure will be able to directly provide support for authors that do not want to deal with state IP protection in the first place.

Make it hard for users to get to your "IP" and they will simply demand lower prices. Can't provide said lower prices? Well too bad I am sure many young artists can.

[Kludge]

I'm all for the slippery-slope argument, but lets be real. Those sites, while not "hosting" are setup with the SOLE INTENT of making it easy to find pirated materials. And they profit off of it with their ads. Did they have streamlinks for anything that wasn't pirated?

Probably not. Still, the precedent of this being direct infringement is very worrying because later, people can point to these takedowns and then compare them to a site like RPFs. It would be significantly more believable DHS shut down the site for copyright violations, not because of more likely reasons they'd want to shut down RPFs.

Let's say a federal agent actually took the time to compile a list of all illegal content linked to or embedded on RPFs. The # of violations would likely be into the hundreds, possibly thousands. The agent says RPFs has committed at least 800 counts of direct infringement and a judge will eat that shit up.

[Kludge]

This intellectual property battle is reaching it's conclusion. Technology can not easily bypass IP protections. Seizing sites is a last ditch effort and it will go nowhere. There are thousands of sites that are linking to pirated material. Shut one down people will just go to another.

Lastly soon Creative Commons infrastructure will be able to directly provide support for authors that do not want to deal with state IP protection in the first place.

Make it hard for users to get to your "IP" and they will simply demand lower prices. Can't provide said lower prices? Well too bad I am sure many young artists can.

This is why I'm becoming increasingly worried this has absolutely nothing to do with stopping copyright infringement but is a piece in a puzzle toward eliminating (or at least hindering) free speech on the Internet. Nobody could possibly believe playing whac-a-mole with domain seizures will do anything toward stopping piracy. Either the USG bureaucracy is being incredibly stupid and wasting resources (very believable), or there is something more sinister going on (plausible).

[emazur]

That would suck if true. It would be a great way to take down your enemies. Someone for instance could join RPF with the intention of infiltration, climb the ladder to become moderator, then post/approve of unauthorized youtube vids with the intention of shutting down the site, and send his own 'anonymous' tip to the enforcement thugs.

[specsaregood]

This is why I'm becoming increasingly worried this has absolutely nothing to do with stopping copyright infringement but is a piece in a puzzle toward eliminating (or at least hindering) free speech on the Internet. Nobody could possibly believe playing whac-a-mole with domain seizures will do anything toward stopping piracy. Either the USG bureaucracy is being incredibly stupid and wasting resources (very believable), or there is something more sinister going on (plausible).

Or there is a profit motive and the corporations that are in bed with the govt are getting their goons to do their work for them. Not much of a profit motive to take down RPFs.

[Kludge]

Or there is a profit motive and the corporations that are in bed with the govt are getting their goons to do their work for them. Not much of a profit motive to take down RPFs.

- But taking down domains doesn't do anything to stop piracy. There's no profit motive. People will either go somewhere else, or use one of the alternate domains pointing to the very same server. However, I'm not saying corporations are smart enough to realize this. The MPAA spent a huge amount of resources, for example, to have TPB's ISP cut off service to them - and they, very predictably, were back up within hours. Still, even if there were a perceived profit motive in shutting down sites like TPB or a website embedding videos to illegal content, it creates the scary precedent I'd never want the USG to have that it's okay to take down websites because they link to illegal content.

I see this progressing into legislation where raids can be conducted on servers if given the same evidence judges are granting these ICE domain takedowns now, seeing takedowns alone are ineffective. They'll then hold the servers for extended amounts of time going through data to find incriminating material.

[Kludge]

Oh fuck. I've turned into a conspiracy theorist, haven't I?

[specsaregood]

- But taking down domains doesn't do anything to stop piracy. There's no profit motive. People will either go somewhere else, or use one of the alternate domains pointing to the very same server. However, I'm not saying corporations are smart enough to realize this. The MPAA spent a huge amount of resources, for example, to have TPB's ISP cut off service to them - and they, very predictably, were back up within hours. Still, even if there were a perceived profit motive in shutting down sites like TPB or a website embedding videos to illegal content, it creates the scary precedent I'd never want the USG to have that it's okay to take down websites because they link to illegal content.


What you say may be true -- that it is pointless and impossible to stop -- BUT, that doesn't mean some paper pusher can't point to the takedown as a success, a reason to keep their job, collect their paycheck and make their boss happy for a couple days, go home and have a meal and drink, then go to bed and make a couple more future paper pushers.

[silverhandorder]

What you say may be true -- that it is pointless and impossible to stop -- BUT, that doesn't mean some paper pusher can't point to the takedown as a success, a reason to keep their job, collect their paycheck and make their boss happy for a couple days, go home and have a meal and drink, then go to bed and make a couple more future paper pushers.

And then have a couple of more raids and more raids and get more paper pushers hired to do even more raids to the point where they need to make excuses for new types of raids and in the end we have RPF shut down.

W/e point of view some one holds I think we call can agree that this is bad.

[Anti Federalist]

Oh fuck. I've turned into a conspiracy theorist, haven't I?

Yup.

[heavenlyboy34]

Oh fuck. I've turned into a conspiracy theorist, haven't I?

That, and someone with a creepy avatar. :eek:

[Danke]

Why embed anyway? I always watch in another tab.

[pcosmar]

Does that mean if we link a youtube on the film option for this site, we put Brian and Josh at risk? Should we just post the link, instead of putting it on so it 'appears'?

I fully believe that they make shit up as they go. And that they will continue to do so until told in no uncertain terms.

NO

[Kludge]

bump

[BarryDonegan]

This is an extremely dangerous precedent!

[cindy25]

the only solution is a non-USA domain

[DirtMcGirt]

I haven't read all the comments before me; my personal experience w/ channelsurfing is that a ton of people at my school would log on at all times of the day. Mainly to watch sporting events from anywhere in real time... I figured there was no way professional leagues w/ their huge tv contracts were going to let that go on for much longer...

[Dreamofunity]

I haven't read all the comments before me; my personal experience w/ channelsurfing is that a ton of people at my school would log on at all times of the day. Mainly to watch sporting events from anywhere in real time... I figured there was no way professional leagues w/ their huge tv contracts were going to let that go on for much longer...

The history on the browsers on the computers in my school library is filled with TV streaming sites. Bastards use up all the computers to watch shows like Monk when I need to get work done. I hope they ban all streaming sites for that reason alone. :P

[Yieu]

The history on the browsers on the computers in my school library is filled with TV streaming sites. Bastards use up all the computers to watch shows like Monk when I need to get work done. I hope they ban all streaming sites for that reason alone. :P

I am sure if that is really an issue, you could complain to the librarian and they would handle the situation. Everyone knows that library computers are for school work, and I am sure the librarian would have no problems with holding people accountable to the rules of the library.

[Dreamofunity]

I am sure if that is really an issue, you could complain to the librarian and they would handle the situation. Everyone knows that library computers are for school work, and I am sure the librarian would have no problems with holding people accountable to the rules of the library.

I don't really care, it was a joke. They use a lot of streaming sites on those computers though, which is funny considering as a policy to sign on to the wifi you have to agree not to use p2p sharing websites, I wonder if this will affect that policy.