Japan police arrest two for file sharing
Posted by Daniel Fleshbourne on 08 December 2003 - 17:01 · 24 comments & 1368 views
- Advertisement
-
-
(3 replies)
#1 Posted by raid517 on 08 Dec 2003 - 17:19
- Sh*t - and I thought Freenet was secure... It seems to me that Governments can pretty much snoop on anything these days...
Q -
#1.1 Posted by YaddaMe on 08 Dec 2003 - 19:36
- I wouldnt buy into any program that claims to hide you addy at this time... b/c it would involed an extremely massive bandwidth bill that I dont think any p2p program could maintain.
The only way to hide your ip from the rest of the world on a p2p program is for the file transfer to go through a middleman.... meaning each & every file transfer would be uploaded to the server, and then passed on the the downloader.... it's just not feasable to pay that kind of bandwidth bill when there is little to no revenue coming in. -
#1.2 Posted by mlauzon on 08 Dec 2003 - 19:50
QUOTE (#1.1) I wouldnt buy into any program that claims to hide you addy at this time... b/c it would involed an extremely massive bandwidth bill that I dont think any p2p program could maintain.
ESV claims to do that, not that I would use that program...tried it once and was not impressed; got uninstalled right away!!!
Michael Lauzon, Founder
The Quill Society
http://www.quillsociety.org/
mlauzon@quillsociety.org
-
#2 Posted by plasticparadox on 08 Dec 2003 - 17:20
- Yikes... good thing I went legit a few months ago. Now all they have to do is bring iTunes Music Store to Japan (which has already been announced) and I'll be set.
-
#3 Posted by JSemple3 on 08 Dec 2003 - 17:54
- Good thing I only download and don't fileshare (and I only don't share as I am on a dialup modem)
-
(2 replies)
#4 Posted by Chineseyes on 08 Dec 2003 - 18:03
- Whats with the posting of news thats a couple of days old, this has been on other sites for a little while now along with a couple of other articles that have appeared recently I'm not complaining just observing.
-
#4.1 Posted by sputnik on 08 Dec 2003 - 18:27
QUOTE (#4.0) Whats with the posting of news thats a couple of days old, this has been on other sites for a little while now along with a couple of other articles that have appeared recently I'm not complaining just observing
Snah
! Its news to me
-
(1 reply)
#5 Posted by mlauzon on 08 Dec 2003 - 19:13
- I would have tried Winny, the problem is that it's not in English....
Michael Lauzon, Founder
The Quill Society
http://www.quillsociety.org/
mlauzon@quillsociety.org -
#5.1 Posted by divertom15 on 08 Dec 2003 - 20:13
- probably why ive never heard of it
-
#6 Posted by cesardrgn on 08 Dec 2003 - 20:08
- No one is safe...
-
(7 replies)
#7 Posted by Tech_8356 on 08 Dec 2003 - 20:51
- So, theoretically, if one never uploads or actually shares files...only downloads them, then they're pretty much undetectable?
-
#7.2 Posted by PlainLazy on 08 Dec 2003 - 21:19
- A little pointless though dont you think, since it is called file SHARING after all....
-
#7.3 Posted by Tech_8356 on 08 Dec 2003 - 21:32
- share?
who wants to share when you can be greedy and hog it all to your self??
IMHO, it seems like these law dudes don't go after the people who do the downloading...just the people who provide the downloads...
-
#7.4 Posted by Zelpus on 08 Dec 2003 - 21:39
QUOTE So, theoretically, if one never uploads or actually shares files...only downloads them, then they're pretty much undetectable?
its called leeching and people have been doing it for years
-
#7.5 Posted by Joshie on 09 Dec 2003 - 01:24
- I've never had a problem with leechers. I think it's perfectly acceptable, especially when it comes to the file sharing community.
See, it's called file 'sharing'. The people leechers flock to are sharing their files. That's that. That's how it works. There are file sharers, and they are sharing their files with the leechers.
If you only give something away because you expect to get something in return, then you don't quite understand what the word 'share' means. Mommy didn't teach you to go to your friend and say, "I'll share my cookies with you if you give me one of your brownies." That's not sharing--it's TRADING. And if that's what you're going for, call it file trading, not file sharing.
Got it? Ku. -
#7.6 Posted by Unplugged on 09 Dec 2003 - 03:14
- Yes and then you cant download inthing because nobody is sharing
What a great idea -
#7.7 Posted by No_Style on 09 Dec 2003 - 13:52
- You're forgetting his point. The world was not always P2P. Before that, there were many other sources where people do put up things to download for NOTHING. Yes NOTHING. They didn't want anything in return. P2P is great because it can bring out more stuff out of people and "forces" people to share their goodies, but look at the trouble P2P is bringing. We've got viruses, lawsuits and much more issues that are more rampant now.
-
(1 reply)
#8 Posted by orphic on 08 Dec 2003 - 22:30
- One word...USENET
-
#9 Posted by Coolme on 08 Dec 2003 - 22:38
- Yikes! I would rather have a law suit.
-
#10 Posted by Ev1lg0at on 09 Dec 2003 - 00:32
- i cant believe this... "why share when u can leech heheheh" oh ye.. keep doing this and we'll see how far the sharing will go... pfft
its just retards like you who will get these sharing apps closed down, not the gay IRAA.
Submit to reddit
Submit to blinklist
Bookmark on del.icio.us
Add to furl
Share on Facebook
Add to Windows Live

The Japanese case demonstrates how difficult it can be to stay anonymous on the Internet. The two suspects, a 41-year-old man who runs a business and an unemployed 19-year-old, were detained November 27 for alleged copyright violations using a "peer-to-peer" program called Winny that is available on the Internet for free. The program allows users to trade files without revealing their Internet Protocol address, the Internet's equivalent of a phone number.
Kyoto police spokesman Yukinori Kumamoto didn't say how police identified the suspects. Winny is partly based on Freenet, a freely distributed program intended to bypass Internet censorship by making users anonymous.
Critical to the United States and some other developed countries is keeping control of the internet in the private sector and not handing it off to a new United Nations agency as proposed by nations such as China and Brazil.
"We think it's extraordinarily important that it continue to be private sector-led," Mr Gross said, noting that the existing, semi-private US-created Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) was already capable of managing the worldwide web.
"We think that ICANN has in place opportunities for input from governments" who have concerns about internet technical issues, he said.
Control of the internet is one of the thorniest points of contention in the leadup to the summit which is intended to bridge the digital divide between rich and poor and is to be attended by at least 62 heads of state.
Last month, the executive director of the summit's secretariat said he was disappointed at the lack of progress being made by negotiators, and said it would be a "miracle" if a draft declaration could be reached before the meeting.
According to Mr Gross, the United States, at least is not willing to compromise on its positions - particularly on ensuring that freedom of speech and expression is endorsed by the summiteers.
"We believe that is extraordinarily important," he said, affirming that free speech as a fundamental principle of the internet.
Advocacy groups have claimed that nations like China, Egypt, Pakistan, Tunisia and Vietnam are hoping to use the summit to gain power to censure the dissemination of information.
"We are always concerned about statements that might be misunderstood as sanctioning restrictions, either of freedom of expression or on the freedom of the press," Mr Gross said.
On US opposition to the "digital solidarity fund" proposed by Senegal, he noted that the United States already had in place a program - the "digital freedom initiative" - to assist developing nations with internet technology.
"We don't think that the case has been made for the creation of a new international fund focusing on these issues in the way in which it's been described so far," Mr Gross said.
Washington has concerns about how the money would be collected, who would administer the fund, and what countries would benefit from it, he said.
"We do not endorse it right now, even in its voluntary form, because we're concerned about how these things play out," Mr Gross said.
He said the United States believed that developing nations needed to focus first on improving rule of law and their commitment to free market economies before launching into internet projects.