Microsoft Issues Takedown Notices Over COFEE 69
Eugen tips news that Microsoft has sent DMCA takedown notices to several websites to stop them from offering the Computer Online Forensic Evidence Extractor (COFEE) tool for download after it was leaked earlier this month. One of the sites, Cryptome.org, has posted their correspondence with Microsoft over the software. "... Microsoft contacted Network Solutions, which hosts Cryptome, and since John Young, the owner of the website, wasn't too keen on losing his whole website for the sake of a single 15MB file, he removed the download link and sent Network Solutions a notice of compliance."
CRYPTOME? (Score:3, Interesting)
John fearlessly posts pictures of ECHELON listening posts, Dick Cheney's Secret Bunker, the names of MI5 Moles in the IRA, CIA internal memos and the like.
But they can't take him down on NetSol - which is chock-full of spooks itself!
No, that's only Microsoft, and it's DMCA threat.
So. For how long has Cryptome been a disinformation channel?
I can relate. (Score:5, Interesting)
"... Microsoft contacted Network Solutions, which hosts Cryptome, and since John Young, the owner of the website, wasn't too keen on losing his whole website for the sake of a single 15MB file, he removed the download link and sent Network Solutions a notice of compliance."
I can relate to this. Around 2002 I received notice over a few files that a website had on one of my servers. I talked it over with the individual (owner) and he agreed it wasn't worth the effort and removed them. Everyone was happy.
I know /. regularly crucifies people who comply with these notices as wimps, corporate sellouts, etc, but when someone has to put food on the table, and really does not care about the content more than their own livelihood, then there really is no issue. This is why we have wikileaks, etc, so that individuals do not have to bear the brunt of responsibility for hosting these leaked files or other sensitive info.
In the case of COFEE, it was a 'stealing software' issue, and not a 'this is my right to leak this program' issue. Or maybe it is...maybe some reverse engineers can find out COFEE is putting innocent people beind bars?
Re:huh? (Score:4, Interesting)
Mission Accomplished.
You now believe that copyright violation is the most serious bit of public misbehavior a citizen can get up to. --And, no, I'm not talking about this particular incident, or that particular website, (which I've never even heard of). I'm talking about the national freak-out which began with Napster, and which I was laughing at way back then, but have come to seriously believe may be the crowbar used to justify the final descent into totalitarianism. That's how ludicrous this has all become.
Ooooooh. Somebody didn't watch adverts while downloading a crappy bit of Hollywood. Opiate of the masses, and now the latest excuse to storm your home with the most recent incarnation of the Gestapo.
That and Organic Farming, for equally preposterous reasons. A cat can NOT look at a king and you WILL eat toxic food.
-FL
Re:I can relate. (Score:2, Interesting)
Maybe.
> Note to everyone out there faced with a "leak": The best thing to do is NOTHING.
That depends on your goal.
> By trying to have something removed, it will only be spread more widely.
True.
> If Microsoft had simply ignored the incident, Cryptome would have hosted
> it and the vast majority of people would have never even heard of COFEE.
Also true.
> Now, tons of people are downloading it just BECAUSE
> of the reports of their takedown campaign.
Yes. But, speaking as a cynic, how do you know that this isn't why it was leaked in the first place? How do you know Microsoft didn't *plan* to invoke this reverse-psychology failed suppression effect to create buzz?
There's an old saying: there's no such thing as bad publicity. This isn't strictly true in the absolute sense, but it's much *closer* to true than many people realize. If it weren't for bad publicity, Microsoft would hardly have any publicity at all and yet, somehow, they seem to be doing okay, fiscally speaking.
Maybe I'm giving Microsoft too much credit, but it seems possible to me that someone within the organization arranged this on purpose, unofficially of course, as a form of marketing.