RE: [7.8.2002 44916] Notice of Copyright Infringement

["Dom De Vitto" <dom () DeVitto com>]

> From a Peekabooty standpoint you get all your information from
your direct peers, of course they are very likely to be proxying
the data from another peer (etc, etc).

I believe that a number of peekabooty "starting hosts" are setup,
but just like gnutella, these are just arbitary start points,
so shutting them down would just mean another was advertised
elsewhere.  So no "service" would exist, I'd hope.

Dom

 |-----Original Message-----
 |From: Golden_Eternity [mailto:bhodi_jabir () yahoo com] 
 |Sent: Friday, July 12, 2002 9:25 PM
 |To: Dom De Vitto; vuln-dev () securityfocus com
 |Subject: RE: [7.8.2002 44916] Notice of Copyright Infringement
 |
 |
 |I'm waiting for anonymizer/peekabooty incorporation into a 
 |p2p network.
 |
 |If the goal of the network is universal access to the files, 
 |then the DMCA goons are gonna be able to get at the files. 
 |And if the connections are direct to the system hosting the 
 |contraband, then you have the situation we're talking about 
 |right now. But if the route were somehow obfuscated, then no 
 |one would really know what system was actually sharing the files out.
 |
 |Of course, then the MPAA/RIAA/etc might go after the P2P 
 |service if one exists (a la napster) or they might be able to 
 |go after you as being a party to the violation even though 
 |you don't host the file yourself, just act as a node on the network...
 |
 |But it could be interesting.
 |
 |-G_E
 |
 |> A better system would be to distrubute (over many hosts) 
 |pieces which 
 |> are not recognisable individually (e.g. bit0.bin, bit1,
 |> ...bit8.bin) and then distribute a recombination system.
 |> That would mean that you individually would have 
 |"0101010100", which 
 |> they would have to prove was part of whatever.mpg.... ...difficult, 
 |> and harder to prove that _you_knew_ that's what it was!
 |
 |
 |
 |