MPAA Sets Up Fake Site to Catch Pirates

thefickler writes "Media Defender, a company which does the dirty work for the MPAA, has been caught setting up 'dummy' websites in an attempt to catch those who download copyrighted videos. The site, MiiVi.com, complete with a user registration, forum, and "family filter", offered complete downloads of movies and "fast and easy video downloading all in one great site." But that's not all; MiiVi also offered client software to speed up the downloading process. The only catch is, after it was installed, it searched your computer for other copyrighted files and reported back."

Not to state the obvious, but . . .

[PIPBoy3000]

The only catch is, after it was installed, it searched your computer for other copyrighted files and reported back.

Doesn't this violate various anti-spyware laws? [ncsl.org] For example, here's Illinois' law:

Creates the Consumer Protection Against Computer Spyware Act. Sets forth provisions for unauthorized collection or culling of personally identifiable information, unauthorized access to or modifications of computer settings and computer damage, unauthorized interference with installation or disabling computer software, and other prohibited conduct. Provides that certain persons may bring a civil action against a violator of the Act. Exempts willful and wanton misconduct from the limitation on liability.

The saddest part about this...

[tgatliff]

They knew they were going to eventually get caught. It doesnt take a genius to realize that if "going dark" after 10 hours of the article release that they were anticipating this... And I suspect if the media contacts them, then it will be the classic "the intern did it" type response.... These guys make the russian mafia look good by comparison...

Re:Not to state the obvious, but . . .

[timmarhy]

only an EULA isn't a contract and no one can make you give up legal rights or protections.

Re:Not to state the obvious, but . . .

[Anonymous Coward]

What? In general, EULAs are considered legally to be boilerplate contracts. The fact that you, and apparently a mod, think that EULAs are somehow non-binding blows my mind.

Re:Not to state the obvious, but . . .

[Otterley]

Wrong; at least a growing minority courts have held that a EULA, if agreed to by the party installing the software, is a contract enforceable by law. See, e.g., ProCD, Inc. v. Zeidenberg, 86 F.3d 1447 (7th Cir., 1996) [findlaw.com].

Re:Got Ethics? Perception of RIAA/CRIA vs. MPAA

[djmurdoch]

CRIA doesn't get the loot, CPCC does. They report on how it is distributed. [cpcc.ca] About 15 percent of it is distributed to record companies, but most goes to authors and publishers. You can see the mechanics of it here. [cpcc.ca]

Re:Entrapment or Honeypot?

[puddpunk]

Listen: Entrapment is only entrapment when performed by a law enforcement official.

The MPAA is not a law enforcement official - as much as they want to be.

What anti-spyware laws?

[westlake]

Doesn't this violate various anti-spyware laws? For example, here's Illinois' law:

This bill has been bounced back and forth between the Illinois House and Senate for two years, without any final action being taken. Bill Status of HB0380 Spyware Prevent Initiative Act [ilga.gov]

Only Arkansas and Virginia have anything on the statute books, and the Virgina law has openings for the rights agencies you could drive a tank through. To begin, you have to prove "malacious intent."

2007 State Legislation Relating to Internet Spyware or Adware [ncsl.org], An Act to amend and reenact 18.2-152.4 of the Code of Virginia, relating to computer trespass; spyware; penalty [state.va.us]

Re:uh oh....

[jlarocco]

If I have a friend record a TV show (VCR or DVR) and give me the recording so I can watch it later, It's okay.

No, going 100% by the law, that isn't okay. Fortunately, it's only illegal if you get caught, and short of 100% surveillance, there's no realistic way to catch people doing it.

Re:Entrapment or Honeypot?

[toddestan]

In this case it is the MPAA doing the spying. Most of the MPAA's content content is distributed on DVDs encrypted with CSS. So unlike CDs where you can legally rip CDs you own to your harddrive, you can't do this for most movies without violating the DMCA by cracking the encryption. So they probably feel pretty safe that if they find any MPAA content on your harddrive (DVD rips), that you've committed some kind of crime.

Re:uh oh....

[fractoid]

If I watch a TV show live, It's okay. (Even if I don't watch the commercials.)
If I record a TV show with a VCR and watch it later, It's okay.
If I record a TV show on a DVR and watch it later, It's okay.

Everything up to this point has been OK.

If I have a friend record a TV show (VCR or DVR) and give me the recording so I can watch it later, It's okay.

Narp. That's the bit that's not OK. Well, I'm pretty sure it's not legal anyways. If your friend actually hands you his only copy then sure, but if he copies the tape and hands you the copy (as happens in a torrent) then you're making an unauthorized copy and therefore violating copyright.

Re:uh oh....

[fractoid]

Good question! I'd guess that if you give someone else a copy while keeping a copy then the second copy isn't considered 'for personal purposes', but I know that laws vary around the place. Specifically, doesn't Canada have explicitly unregulated personal copying in this way? IE. if we both lived in Canada, I could burn you a copy of Metallica's latest CD and there's jack all Metallica or anyone else can say about it? Of course if I then ask for money for it...

This would be fun...

[The Impossible]

The dutch law is very clear about this. Under dutch law it's completely legal to download stuff from the internet. This is mostly due to the fact people will download anyway. They put a special tax on empty cd's and dvd's to compensate the loss of income. (and yes, the compact cassette had a same tax)

Also, under the same dutch law, it's illegal to offer copyrighted materials for download...

I for one would be very interested to see what the judges think of this kind of setup. Would it stand up in dutch court or would the US law be enforced. (Ah well, as long as the US think they can evade international laws... who cares about the US laws. ;) )

Re:uh oh....

[crucini]

Or is it illegal to download a movie (or a song) no matter what?

Yes. Unless you have permission from the copyright holder.

...(as in, is there a difference between ripping a movie yourself and downloading a copy of it?)

Both are illegal in the US.

There is a popular myth on slashdot that you have a legal right to rip music or movies that you've bought. There is no such right. [copyright.gov]

Re:uh oh....

[slart42]

If I watch a TV show live, It's okay. (Even if I don't watch the commercials.)
If I record a TV show with a VCR and watch it later, It's okay.
If I record a TV show on a DVR and watch it later, It's okay.
If I have a friend record a TV show (VCR or DVR) and give me the recording so I can watch it later, It's okay.

There's a german site, www.onlinetvrecorder.com, which so far managed to avoid lawsuits by using this argumentation. They let you download (for free) anything running on german television, as long as you specifiy that you want it beforehand. By doing that, they argue that the user is doing nothing else then programming a VCR, or in this case designating someone else to do it.

Re:uh oh....

[discojohnson]

When a theft occurs, the thief has gained something and the thieved has lost something without their consent. ... Copying data is not related to theft, in any way.

See, you contradicted yourself. When you copy something, you take away the scarcity of the product. If I have 10 copies of my movie, I can sell it for $10 a pop. If you make a 10 copies, now the market has twice as many, making my product less scarce, hence you took away from the value of the movie. Wouldn't you get pissed if you paid $50k for a BMW just for me to copy it, for free mind you? It'd make it worth a hell of a lot less. My comment isn't about copying physical goods, but in a digital world scarcity of a product is what helps drive costs. You can still have scarcity in an infinitely non-scare economy (bonus features on the dvd, cover art, backstage passes, shirts, etc) which will make revenue.

Re:uh oh....

[Anonymous Coward]

[from link in parent:]
Can I backup my computer software?
Yes, under certain conditions as provided by section 117 of the Copyright Act. Although the precise term used under section 117 is "archival" copy, not "backup" copy, these terms today are used interchangeably. This privilege extends only to computer programs and not to other types of works.

Under section 117, you or someone you authorize may make a copy of an original computer program if:

        * the new copy is being made for archival (i.e., backup) purposes only;
        * you are the legal owner of the copy; and
        * any copy made for archival purposes is either destroyed, or transferred with the original copy, once the original copy is sold, given away, or otherwise transferred.

You are not permitted under section 117 to make a backup copy of other material on a computer's hard drive, such as other copyrighted works that have been downloaded (e.g., music, films).

It is also important to check the terms of sale or license agreement of the original copy of software in case any special conditions have been put in place by the copyright owner that might affect your ability or right under section 117 to make a backup copy. There is no other provision in the Copyright Act that specifically authorizes the making of backup copies of works other than computer programs even if those works are distributed as digital copies.
[/from link in parent]

Would making a backup of a music CD and storing the original in an archive storage count for "the new copy is being made for archival (i.e., backup) purposes only"?
I always rip my original music CDs and store them away (archive them?) only playing the rips I've made. I have not shared the original or the rips with anyone.

What is stupid about this

[kahrytan]

What is so stupid about this sleezy tactic is that there is no guarantee that any videos on a person's hard drive is illegal.

1. The Movie COULD BE converted using commercial off the self software. Divx Pro can do it along with many others. Just walk into your nearest computer store.
2. TV Episodes can be recorded via any TV tuner card. Such as WinTV cards.

The presence of movies and tv episodes on the hard drive doesn't make it illegal.

Re:uh oh....

[gruntled]

Flatly incorrect. It's not a myth, it's the Audio Home Recording Act of 1992, which modified the U.S. Code with regard to copyright law to specifically give consumers the right to make copies for themselves (and even give away a very limited number of copies to friends and / or family). Here's an analysis from Duke law school: http://www.law.duke.edu/journals/dltr/articles/200 2dltr0023.html [duke.edu]

In general, your liability only exists when you *share* items. That is, all the legal actions by the RIAA / MPAA have alleged illegal distribution. Essentially, your behavior exposes you to legal action only when your behavior might negatively impact the market for an item. Arguably making yourself a copy of an item can deprive the owner of the item income, thus negatively impacting intellectual property owner. However, one can argue that in fact you would have never paid for the single copy, and therefore you haven't negatively impacted the IP owner at all. That's why photocopy machines / VCRs, etc. can exist. It's not because the IP owners don't mind, it's that they've (thus far) been unable to convince the courts that such copying negatively impacts their market.

Giving away copies, however, is a very different matter. No matter how "non-commercial" your activity is, if you give away enough of a product, you'll reduce the amount of money the IP owner can charge for the item, or put the IP owner out of business. So distribution gets you at the top of legal liability list.