×

Announcing: Slashdot Deals - Explore geek apps, games, gadgets and more. (what is this?)

Thank you!

We are sorry to see you leave - Beta is different and we value the time you took to try it out. Before you decide to go, please take a look at some value-adds for Beta and learn more about it. Thank you for reading Slashdot, and for making the site better!

Demonoid BitTorrent Tracker Apparently Back Online

samzenpus posted about a year ago | from the share-away dept.

The Internet 134

Freshly Exhumed writes "TorrentFreak has broken the news that after more than a year of downtime the Demonoid tracker is back online. The tracker is linked to nearly 400,000 torrent files and more than a million peers, which makes it one of the largest working BitTorrent trackers on the Internet. There is no word yet on when the site will make a full comeback, but the people behind it say they are working to revive one of the most famous file-sharing communities. As the single largest semi-private BitTorrent tracker that ever existed, Demonoid used to offer a home to millions of file-sharers. Note that this is apparently the original Demonoid and not the d2 site that claims to be using the Demonoid database."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

nigger (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45932787)

slashdot is niggers. slashdot is pants. slashdot is big nigger donkey dong.

facty facts!

you good sir are an a full blown case of asshole c (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45932945)

kindly roll over and die in a fire

Re:you good sir are an a full blown case of asshol (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45933055)

I read it as "big nigger donkey kong," but when I looked at it again it was actually written, "big nigger donkey dong." Very confusing indeed. It was, however, a most hilarious first post, and in fact posts like the grandparent's first post are the only reasons why I visit Slashdot nowadays. Well, at least I can be thankful that it didn't force me into the Beta this time.

By the way, the Chargers will win the Denver game today. You know why? The system is being rigged so that the Chargers will finally win their first Super Bowl. Know why? Because here in San Diego(where I live) they tried to get the taxpayers to foot the bill for a new Super Bowl worthy stadium, and they failed because the Chargers were goddamn losers who couldn't manage talent, hence the public opposition for shelling out a billion dollars to a bunch of losers. Nevermind that the NFL are so goddamn rich they can buy their own goddamn stadium in San Diego, but that's besides the point. A super bowl win would make a proposal to force taxpayers to pay for a new stadium much more palatable to San Diegans. Mark my fucking words - the Chargers will win.

-- Ethanol-fueled

Re:you good sir are an a full blown case of asshol (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45934029)

Sports don't matter. Like celebrity gossip, they are a time-sink philistines and other dull people, in much the same way that state lotteries are a money-sink for the same. None of these distractions warrant any discussion by people who think about things that do matter.

Sounds safe (4, Funny)

ArbitraryName (3391191) | about a year ago | (#45932829)

I'll get right to downloading and shop on Silk Road while I wait.

Re:Sounds safe (0)

arisvega (1414195) | about a year ago | (#45932981)

I'll get right to downloading and shop on Silk Road while I wait.

You would not sound sarcastic and an ass if perhaps you knew that in the future it will not be as easy for a central authority to take down websites at a whim.

You may want to look at what Namecoin [wikipedia.org] is.

Re:Sounds safe (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45933069)

Yes, because namecoin prevents agencies from using servers at those IPs and setting up a user honeypot.

Brilliant.

Certificate fingerprint (1)

tepples (727027) | about a year ago | (#45933569)

Until someone gets the bright idea to store X.509 certificate fingerprints in Namecoin. Instead of paying a commercial CA for a TLS certificate, a .bit site owner would do something analogous to what's done with DNSSEC [wikipedia.org] : self-sign a certificate and store its fingerprint in the domain name registry.

Re:Certificate fingerprint (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45933607)

Yes, because certificate fingerprints prevents agencies from using servers at those IPs with certificates procured through court or threat upon owners and setting up a user honeypot.

Brilliant.

How deep does the rabbit hole go? (4, Funny)

tepples (727027) | about a year ago | (#45933747)

How deep does the rabbit hole of government hijacking go? The government could be running a man-in-the-middle attack on all five of your senses to keep you in a honeypot that is the only existence you've known since birth. How can anyone be sure that this isn't the case?

Do you think that's air you're breathing now? [youtube.com]

Re:How deep does the rabbit hole go? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45934803)

I prefer to think of it as a fur-lined cage into which we are born.

Re:Sounds safe (1)

ArbitraryName (3391191) | about a year ago | (#45933073)

Oh good. In the future it will not be as easy.

Well I live in the present, and "not as easy" is hardly a ringing endorsement anyway. But thanks for letting me know someone has reinvented decentralized DNS. That's certainly an idea that has never been tried before. Mentioning that as somehow relevant to a Tor hidden node being compromised leads me to believe you don't understand the topic anyway.

Re:Sounds safe (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45933133)

namecoin is a dead project

Re:Sounds safe (-1, Troll)

lgw (121541) | about a year ago | (#45933185)

DNS was decentralized at first as well (at one point Microsoft was getting blackholed so often that had a $50k bounty for the contact info of anyone running a DNS server, not exactly public knowledge). At some point the US government decided DNS was actually important, and the DHS got involved and so on.

There are already a few encrypted networks out there where anyone can set up a server, and the government has to do a bit more work to take it down. The problem is enough making people aware of any of them to have the network effect take over, and making new ones just makes that problem worse.

Re:Sounds safe (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45933403)

wow, thats one of the most self important and factually backwards posts i've ever read.

for the sake of your soul i dearly hope you are a troll

Re:Sounds safe (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45933723)

At least he demonstrated the ability to use his Shift key.

Re:Sounds safe (4, Informative)

Jah-Wren Ryel (80510) | about a year ago | (#45933749)

DNS was decentralized at first as well (at one point Microsoft was getting blackholed so often that had a $50k bounty for the contact info of anyone running a DNS server, not exactly public knowledge). At some point the US government decided DNS was actually important, and the DHS got involved and so on.

I can't tell if you are joking or not. But for anyone else reading along who takes what you wrote seriously -- it is total bullshit. DNS has always been hierarchal with root servers under the control of a central authority. There have been bugs that could be exploited to corrupt lookups, but it has never been decentralized.

Re:Sounds safe (1)

lgw (121541) | about a year ago | (#45934467)

Fair point, but the point remains that there are already several established decentralized alternatives, if you don't like a centrally-managed DNS. Systems like TOR, where you pretty much need to take down the server itself, or freenet's serverless approach.. While such things are slow, they'd work fine for a site that hosts trackers, not content.

DNS managed by a central authority serves the needs of large business well, and isn't going away. Want something else for stuff that large businesses don't like? Established alternatives exist, and inventing new approaches to DNS itself just muddy the waters.

Re:Sounds safe (5, Interesting)

hairyfeet (841228) | about a year ago | (#45933191)

And YOU sir might not sound so naive and clueless if you knew that this wouldn't be the first time a honeypot [neoseeker.com] was set up to catch P2P users. Personally I'd trust this about as much as I trust the NSA right now, which is zero. Hell the head of Demonoid said last year the odds of coming back were zip, they had cops all over their asses, then suddenly out of the blue they are back, fulled loaded, plenty of bandwidth? Yeah and if you pull the right leg it plays jingle bells.

Re:Sounds safe (1)

LordLimecat (1103839) | about a year ago | (#45933235)

Trackers like demonoid dont need plenty of bandwidth.

Re:Sounds safe (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45933411)

They do if they're using it to funnel information to the NSA. Bittorrent is streamlined because it's a selling point. The NSA uses as much bandwidth as they want because you're not their fucking customer, you're their victim.

Re:Sounds safe (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45935207)

Why would the NSA give a fuck about torrenting?

Don't be an idiot.

Re:Sounds safe (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45936633)

Why would anyone bother making a honeypot tracker, when joining existing swarms as a peer would be just as easy, and provide them pretty much the same information? BitTorrent isn't exactly a secretive protocol.

Re:Sounds safe (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45936105)

Bullshit. A domain can be taken, an IP blocked. It then becomes a cat and mouse game to make a domain, get people knowing to go there before it gets shut down by whomever, and $whomever puts up a site that looks exactly the same, except just collects details for persecution of the site's users.

Great news (-1, Troll)

suman28 (558822) | about a year ago | (#45932851)

This is great news because for the last few years the media has done their best to demonize torrents and related activity as nothing more than a pirates' leisure time activity. There are truly legitimate uses for torrents and it is great to see that there are good folks working to keep such sites active.

Re: Great news (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45932907)

Are you NSA?

Re: Great news (4, Informative)

dotancohen (1015143) | about a year ago | (#45933049)

Are you NSA?

GP is a karma whore, not (necessarily) NSA. Very easy to identify as they post "the slashdot line" without saying anything substantial.

Re:Great news (2)

1s44c (552956) | about a year ago | (#45932931)

There are legitimate uses for torrents, but demonoid wasn't about distributing Linux iso's or other open source projects. It was about pirating movies and music.

Re:Great news (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45932987)

Where on the site did it say that? I'm pretty sure they let anyone upload torrents for anything. Gun manufacturers don't advertize their product as being good for robberies, that's the choice of the end user.

Re:Great news (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45934057)

Where on the site did it say that? I'm pretty sure they let anyone upload torrents for anything. Gun manufacturers don't advertize their product as being good for robberies, that's the choice of the end user.

Yeah, I use the mp3's to water my plants and I have three thousand episodes of US sitcoms just in case the sewerage backs up.

Re: Great news (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45933013)

No shit

Re:Great news (4, Insightful)

Jah-Wren Ryel (80510) | about a year ago | (#45933513)

There are legitimate uses for torrents, but demonoid ... was about pirating movies and music.

The two are not mutually exclusive. Demonoid had a large collection of abandoned works - music, tv shows, movies, magazines, books, etc that were simply not commercially available. Some were orphaned works where the copyright owner was unknown and so could never be legally distributed again, some where works where the copyright owner just didn't think it was worth it to distribute and some were works that were too risky to distribute commercially - like fan edits of movies and other works that the owner could not afford to go to court to prove their right of fair use. Piracy of those sorts of works serves a legitimate public interest.

Re:Great news (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45933949)

Piracy of those sorts of works serves a legitimate public interest.

Vigilantism works so well in general that I'm glad to see you applying it to copyright law.

Re:Great news (3, Insightful)

Jah-Wren Ryel (80510) | about a year ago | (#45934185)

Vigilantism works so well in general that I'm glad to see you applying it to copyright law.

Nobody is claiming that piracy is about punishment.
It isn't even close to vigilantism.

Re:Great news (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45934519)

Point taken. But rather than punishment, I was thinking more of the idea of "I don't like the law so I'll just create my own." For example, there's a stoplight near my home which I clearly could go through safely most of the time when it's red. Instead, I wait for it each and every time, as does everyone else. Each of us could find laws we don't agree with but that doesn't mean it's a good idea to disregard them. I just think our society works best when everybody plays by the rules that have generally been agreed to.

I actually don't like some elements of copyright law, either. For example, I think the terms are too long and orphaned works ought to be available. But if I don't like the law the way it is, I'd rather work within the system to get it changed rather than just violate it because I disagree with it. (Cynics can call me naive on this point.) In truth, I haven't made any effort to get copyright law changed, but neither have I tried to get the stoplight changed. I can live with both the way they are.

Re:Great news (4, Insightful)

Jah-Wren Ryel (80510) | about a year ago | (#45934639)

I'd rather work within the system to get it changed rather than just violate it because I disagree with it.

Breaking the law because you disagree with it is part of the system. Pot would never have been legalized if it weren't for all those people smoking it in violation of the law. Same thing with anti-miscegenation laws, sodomy laws, removal of the national 55mph speed limit, repeal of prohibition, etc. There are countless examples.

A typical response to that point is to claim that disobedience doesn't count if you don't do it publicly and get arrested. But practically all of the examples I've given were not done publicly - it took wide-scale private law-breaking for people to become comfortable enough with the concepts in order for the handful of court challenges to be successful.

Re:Great news (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45936225)

I follow your point. In that vein, I assume you'd recommend I use some technical means such as Demonoid to circumvent the current copyright law in the hope that doing so will somehow get copyright law changed. Should I apply the same technique to my stoplight?

Re:Great news (1)

Jah-Wren Ryel (80510) | about a year ago | (#45936373)

Do you believe that waiting for a traffic light to change when absolutely no one is around is wrong? If so, then go ahead. I know lots of people who do just that at desserted intersections. I've driven through a few towns that have taken that into account and set lights like that to flashing yellow after midnight.

Re:Great news (1)

SuricouRaven (1897204) | about a year ago | (#45937041)

Until police realised that red light cameras make the most money for them in just that situation.

It's widely rumored, and probably true, that many cities actually shortened the yellow phase in order to increase accidential red-light violations. More fines that way.

Re:Great news (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45936135)

Whoop de fucking do. If you are a warez hound with friends with Demonoid accounts, or you actually have 0-days, you can get an account there. Otherwise, who cares about a private tracker that nobody can access or use unless they are an active scene member. For 99.9% of people out there, Demonoid is irrelevant, just because of the elitism involved.

Re:Great news (4, Interesting)

runeghost (2509522) | about a year ago | (#45933763)

Demonoid also had (legally or not) a great deal of otherwise inaccessible material. Books and music that were out of print and/or out of copyright. TV shows that were never going to get a DVD release even in this day and age. Obscure movies and serials, many of them from the early 20th.

Re:Great news (4, Insightful)

Jane Q. Public (1010737) | about a year ago | (#45933835)

"There are legitimate uses for torrents, but demonoid wasn't about distributing Linux iso's or other open source projects. It was about pirating movies and music."

Actually, no. If you wanted hit movies or music, Demonoid was among the last places you would look. It might have what you were looking for, but probably not.

Demonoid's forte was along the line of more obscure works, like hard-to-find books and such.

Re:Great news (2)

LordLimecat (1103839) | about a year ago | (#45933249)

This is great news because for the last few years the media has done their best to demonize torrents and related activity as nothing more than a pirates' leisure time activity

Lets be real here. If I were to look up usage of torrents by volume and by category (legal video, legal software, illegal video, illegal software), what do you suppose the spread would be? Would you be willing to wager that legal activity was even more than 10%? Because I wouldnt.

Re:Great news (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45933587)

I would. Stuff with cracked software and such is just the most visible. The so-called "legal" (because fuck that designation, morons like RIAA would want everything illegal) torrents are just doing their thing with stable and high traffic and are rather long-lived. Particularly with magnet. You just never hear about them because there's no way to sensationalize torrents being used for standard software and media. It'd be like saying "Millions of web pages served over HTTP!" in a headline. Stupid right? So yeah if you just judge by the headlines no more than 10% of torrent activity is legal. But I'd say you have more conundrums than torrents if you judged based on headlines. Especially on slashdot.

captcha: litigant - Hah.

Re:Great news (1)

Jane Q. Public (1010737) | about a year ago | (#45933881)

"Would you be willing to wager that legal activity was even more than 10%? Because I wouldnt."

In the U.S., it doesn't matter. IANAL, but legally speaking, the amount of illegal vs legal activity is irrelevant. It only has to have genuine legitimate uses to remain legal. Anything else would constitute punishing law-abiders for the actions of others.

See the Betamax decision [wikipedia.org] .

Re:Great news (1)

SuricouRaven (1897204) | about a year ago | (#45937051)

Does that include the WoW updater? It's a torrent client, but Blizzard doesn't label it as such. Presumably they don't want to be associated with 'shady' technology like torrents.

no surprise (1)

Pop69 (700500) | about a year ago | (#45932961)

You can't stop the signal

Yo-ho, Yo-ho (1)

msobkow (48369) | about a year ago | (#45933009)

Yo-ho, Yo-ho, a pirate's life for me!

I remember a disk copier for the Commodore 64 that used to display a flaming golden skull while playing pirate themed music. I didn't own a computer at the time, and my buddy had, of course, pirated the pirate software. :P

Re:Yo-ho, Yo-ho (1)

msobkow (48369) | about a year ago | (#45933027)

The sad thing is, though I download 2-3 movies a week, I haven't watched one to completion since last summer. They're just *lame*.

I couldn't even stomach sitting through the latest "Star Trek", and I consider myself a Trekkie, having watched all the original movies and every episode of every series.

There are lots of really good special effects in the movies nowadays, but it seems they've forgotten about the SCRIPT and the STORY.

Re:Yo-ho, Yo-ho (1)

lgw (121541) | about a year ago | (#45933225)

Ever stop to think that could be because script and story are just as good on the torrented copy, but special effects look better on the big screen?

Re:Yo-ho, Yo-ho (2)

CanadianMacFan (1900244) | about a year ago | (#45933941)

Yes, I think that's the problem. No matter where you view the movie the script and story are still crap.

Re:Yo-ho, Yo-ho (1)

lgw (121541) | about a year ago | (#45934417)

Sure, sure, but people still see the movies. The studios are still focused on what sells tickets and discs, being still blind to making money through online distribution for the most part, and people will pay to see big budget special effects.

Hell, modern action films are just discordant short action clips that don't even explain what's happening in the scene, let alone tell a coherent story where you care if the heros win, and people still pay to see the effects. Or, rather, or more likely to pay to see the effects at the Cinema than they are to pay to see other things.

Re:Yo-ho, Yo-ho (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45934927)

It's the same with many markets these days. Let's just stick to films though..

The movie-goer wants to watch a reasonably-steady stream of films and will happily choose the best few each month - unfortunately, even the 'best' are total shit.

Stream-of-consciousness-type rant:

  * the industry is a rigged game - the reviews are total bullshit, presumably paid-for with dollars redirected from the script-writing budget
  * massive budgets are spent on effects and advertising but the director's hamster wrote the screenplay
  * acting is an almost-dead art-form - wooden-faced 'celebrity' actors 'grace' the screen due to credibility-points earned via their public profile and exploits rather than on-screen presence
  * the ratio of cost:enjoyment-gained is falling so people turn to downloads to skew the ratio back to an acceptable level - this escape is being penalized heavily (stick) with more movie-dollars redirected from script-writing in favor of lawsuits aimed at grandmas rather than (carrot) fixing the ratio
  * every man and his dog seems to have multi-million dollar budgets from investors anxious to suck cash from consumers' pockets without good reason

Fix your shit - hollyweird

Re:Yo-ho, Yo-ho (1)

CanadianMacFan (1900244) | about a year ago | (#45935257)

I never said that the industry wasn't making money. Just that I thought they were producing crap. I've only been to the theatre a handful of times in the past decade because of the poor quality of product. But then I want a good story when I see a movie or watch a TV show.

Torrents have completely changed my viewing habits. I try out lots of things and when I find something that I really like I usually buy it. I say usually because there are a few shows from New Zealand that I would have loved to support but I just can't buy in Canada.

Re:Yo-ho, Yo-ho (1)

lgw (121541) | about a year ago | (#45936709)

Sure, my point was just that the industry only cares about money, and a quite unfortunate effect of torrents is that it makes incoherent effects movies the center of the target, because they're now selling only what people who can see a movie for free on their iPad would pay to see one for.

The worst part is: if the studios would embrace an iTunes-like model for movies, making it easier to pay than torrent (assuming you didn't mind paying), that incentive for crap movies would be greatly diminished.

Re:Yo-ho, Yo-ho (4, Insightful)

msobkow (48369) | about a year ago | (#45934143)

Buddy, if it's not worth watching for free, it sure as hell isn't worth paying for.

Re:Yo-ho, Yo-ho (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45933369)

Hollywood movies these days are a stinking pile of shit. Not worth even 1 $.
Quality these days comes from tv series mostly on cable channels.

Re: Yo-ho, Yo-ho (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45934435)

That was in fact an Amiga program. I have the disk floating around here somewhere.

What can we do to stop this? (-1, Troll)

brit74 (831798) | about a year ago | (#45933023)

The question is: what can we do to permanently remove illegal filesharing from the web? It's offensive to everyone who creates digital media for a living that these kinds of sites operate with impunity.

Re:What can we do to stop this? (-1, Troll)

SpankiMonki (3493987) | about a year ago | (#45933075)

The question is: what can we do to permanently remove illegal filesharing from the web?

That's a pretty tall order, and so far it seems that all the purported cures to the problem have been worse than the disease itself.

It's offensive to everyone who creates digital media for a living that these kinds of sites operate with impunity.

I couldn't agree more. Seems like all the advocates of copyright infringement are those who've never created anything worth paying for.

Re: What can we do to stop this? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45933189)

copyright that isn't in the names of the actual human creators is null & void.

Practical problems with a single human author (2)

tepples (727027) | about a year ago | (#45933655)

Anonymous Coward wrote:

copyright that isn't in the names of the actual human creators is null & void.

This is not currently the law in Slashdot's home country; I'm assuming it's a proposed reform of copyright. In such a system, who is the author of a work whose creation involves thousands of people, such as a feature film or a AAA video game? And what happens to the copyright should this author die a day after the work is published?

Re:What can we do to stop this? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45934311)

I couldn't agree more. Seems like all the advocates of copyright infringement are those who've never created anything worth paying for.

Right. As someone who sells software on the side as a small home business, I can tell folks here that this kind of thing feels quite different when you're the copyright holder. I first found a cracked version of my software on the Internet over ten years ago. It used a fairly simple registration keying system at that time, and probably wasn't too hard to crack. But when I developed that system, it never occurred to me that anybody cared enough about my small-volume software to even try to crack it.

Who know what the motives of the crackers were? Maybe they just enjoyed the challenge of cracking. (Get a puzzle book.) Or maybe they were having a little juvenile fun damaging someone else's property. (Get a spray can and find an abandoned building.) Or maybe they had a High Moral Purpose of freeing the proprietary software from the evil use of copyright. (Donate to the FSF.) Or, maybe they just wanted to keep my kids from going to college. (Sorry, but I can't think of any alternate way to do that.) But if they had enough skills and time to do cracking, why don't they use those talents to *create* something of their own? Isn't that the best way to make the world A Better Place?

At one time, cracks for the software were listed in Google rankings above my own site. That's really discouraging. Fortunately, cracks for the software now have moved down in the search results, though they're still there.

A wise friend of mine who also sells software on the side said that there isn't really any point in fighting crackers because you don't lose much (or any) revenue from it anyway. So, I came to think of my registration keying system as a way of keeping honest people honest, not of defeating those who really want to steal my software. But it still feels like being raped.

The first crack soon disappeared (the cracker had posted it on his employer's site for some silly reason), but a different crack appeared a few years later, this time from sort of cracking group. They also published a key generator. Raped again, only worse. So, I created a much stronger registration keying system, and made every anti-cracking change I could think of to the software design. That took me about six weeks altogether. It truly is a Rube Goldberg machine. It's so complicated, I barely understand it myself. Under my friend's theory, it was wasted effort: six weeks I should have spent improving the product. But if it took me six weeks to create it, I wonder how long it would take someone to duplicate the new keying system via reverse-engineering? Hopefully, it's beyond the average cracker's attention span for small-volume software. Anyway, I think it's working.

I've tried to download some of the cracks that still appear in order to see what I'm currently up against, but it seems that one now has to give credit card numbers to the crackers first. So, I didn't go any further. But the credit-card thing actually is the best anti-cracking technique of all. If someone wants to give their credit card to crackers, I'm all in favor of it. Even if they get my software for free.

(I'm posting as AC in case anyone here wants to track me down and teach me a lesson. Thanks for listening.)

Re:What can we do to stop this? (0)

ButchDeLoria (2772751) | about a year ago | (#45934909)

That's what you get for releasing proprietary software.

Re:What can we do to stop this? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45935103)

You're right. My children don't really need to go college anyway. Heck, a college might teach them how to program. Then, they might use those skills to make the same evil mistakes I've made.

Re:What can we do to stop this? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45935249)

I don't think he would have made any more money if it were GPL.

Re:What can we do to stop this? (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45933109)

Is it? Both Demonoid and The Pirate Bay have received direct blessing from music artists and film-makers and featured their work as promos on their front pages. The question is: Why on Earth are you trying to speak for everybody else? You clearly don't hold the only correct opinion.

Re:What can we do to stop this? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45933179)

Go Galt, stop creating digital media?

Re:What can we do to stop this? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45933207)

Nothing.

Deal with it.

Re:What can we do to stop this? (4, Interesting)

DMUTPeregrine (612791) | about a year ago | (#45933351)

I'm a musician, and make part of my income from my music. All of my music is CC licensed, and some people still buy it. It's certainly not offensive to me that these kinds of site operate with impunity.

Re:What can we do to stop this? (2)

Frosty Piss (770223) | about a year ago | (#45933599)

The "parent" you are responding to talks about "illegal" file sharing - that is, file sharing of content where the copyright does not allow it. Since you licence your files under CC, most are probably not "illegally" shared. But not every artist uses CC.

Just as developers that use GPL code and folks that use CC licensed material must adhere to the copyright conditions associated with GPL and CC, so must they adhere to the copyright conditions that are associated with other types of copyrights.

You can't have it both ways: "you must follow my copyright rules but I don't have to follow yours".

Re:What can we do to stop this? (1)

Jah-Wren Ryel (80510) | about a year ago | (#45934277)

You can't have it both ways: "you must follow my copyright rules but I don't have to follow yours".

Of course you can. You are confusing the form of a thing with intent of a thing.

Stuff like the GPL and CC is about increasing free access, copyright is about limiting free access. The fact that the principles of copyleft are currently implemented on modern copyright law does not validate modern copyright law, it just means that under the current set of circumstances it was the most practical way to get it done.

Re:What can we do to stop this? (1)

DMUTPeregrine (612791) | about a year ago | (#45934421)

Exactly. I'd put my stuff out as public domain, but not every country recognizes such declarations. A CC license (attribution only, not nc or sa) achieves much the same thing, and works for people in such countries.

Accidental infringement of copyright (1)

tepples (727027) | about a year ago | (#45933665)

As a musician, what steps have you taken to make sure that you have not unwittingly incorporated substantial portions of non-CC music into your CC music? George Harrison got in trouble for this (Bright Tunes Music v. Harrisongs Music).

Re:Accidental infringement of copyright (1)

briancox2 (2417470) | about a year ago | (#45933833)

If DMUTPeregrine is guilty of copy right infringement, it makes no difference whether he releases his music under the CC license.

Just as it made no difference for George Harrison, as he released My Sweet Lord in 1971, which didn't have the CC license.

Re:Accidental infringement of copyright (1)

tepples (727027) | about a year ago | (#45934091)

CC or not, how should one go about avoiding accidental copyright infringement?

Re:What can we do to stop this? (1)

nurb432 (527695) | about a year ago | (#45934129)

They also pay to come to your shows. ( assuming you play live )

And as you say, some of us out here do support our 'artists', at least the ones that don't try to screw us.

Re:What can we do to stop this? (4, Interesting)

m00sh (2538182) | about a year ago | (#45933391)

The question is: what can we do to permanently remove illegal filesharing from the web? It's offensive to everyone who creates digital media for a living that these kinds of sites operate with impunity.

First of all, if you are someone who creates digital content and is starting out, this is an amazing boon since it can get your work out to potentially a large audience without any middlemen.

If you are one of those big corporate digital media creators, then create alternatives where buying digital content is preferable to getting them from filesharing networks!

Movies and music downloaded from "official" sources have lower quality than from filesharing. Software, ebooks and other DRM riddled stuff are less restrictive and easy to use downloaded from filesharing.

Last of all, as a lawmaker, don't make copyright essentially last forever. After time, creations become culture and let people share old stuff. Demonoid was great because it had a large repository of stuff that was mostly of historical, nostalgic or cultural interest. Yes, there is still a few drops of blood to be squeezed from old stuff but let it go free so it adds immensely to cultural wealth.

Re:What can we do to stop this? (1)

ButchDeLoria (2772751) | about a year ago | (#45934937)

Yeah, some artists only put out poor-quality MP3s officially, but you'll see 24-bit FLAC on, say, What.cd.

Re:What can we do to stop this? (1)

Threni (635302) | about a year ago | (#45933441)

Simple. You just have to understand that what you're trying to restrict is the duplication of numbers; that numbers can be duplicated perfectly and trivially by computers; that many people want to duplicate those numbers; that many people are sharing those numbers all the time; that it takes time and effort to identify where the numbers are being shared from; that each time you remove a site which faciliates the location of that number, or a list of people who are sharing the numbers, it'll get replaced immediately; that the numbers are much easier to obtain via downloading than via traditional methods; that we're in a recession and buying/renting these numbers is a lower priority than buying food/fuel/paying rent; that there's no technical way of preventing the copying or transmission of these numbers.

Also, many people who create `digital media` (I guess you mean `numbers`) do not find it in the least offensive.

Re:What can we do to stop this? (1)

nurb432 (527695) | about a year ago | (#45934119)

The question is: what can we do to permanently remove illegal file sharing from the web?

Tho you are a troll, ill answer you question anyway: Revamp copyright laws so its NOT illegal for non-profit sharing to occur.

Now back to troll, i do hope you are one of the 'victims' and everything you do is shared 'with impunity'.

Re:What can we do to stop this? (1)

mark-t (151149) | about a year ago | (#45936117)

Revamp copyright laws so its NOT illegal for non-profit sharing to occur.

This idea keeps coming up, but is fundamentally broken, since it is always possible to make profit indirectly by trying to damage your competition. If copyright were revamped as you propose, a larger company that may want to do financial damage to a smaller competitor could resort to distributing that competitor's work entirely on a non-profit basis, relying on their much larger distribution network to effectively circumvent the smaller competitor's revenue stream they might have otherwise wanted to obtain through it. This would effectively mean that only very large conglomerates could effectively have any real control over their copyrights.

We could, if you want... just get rid of the whole concept of copyright entirely, but this carries a baggage of other issues that are also problematic... We are already seeing only glimmers of what would happen as content makers are starting to lose faith in copyright to protect their interests, relying on techniques such as DRM, for example. In utter absence of copyright, such measures are but the tip of a monolithic iceberg that only the very wealthiest people in our society would tend to have the means to actually deal with... and by the time the rest of the public have reasonable access to the same content, it would tend to be the case that it was old enough to no longer be relevant or useful to most.

So... Got any better ideas?

Re:What can we do to stop this? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45936789)

Wow, so you're saying that large corporations might use their massive resources and logistical might to outcompete smaller up and coming competitors? Holy shit, that's nothing at all like what we have today.

demonoid.com still using invalid certificate (2)

SpankiMonki (3493987) | about a year ago | (#45933039)

Technical Details

www.demonoid.com uses an invalid security certificate.

The certificate is not trusted because it is self-signed.

The certificate is only valid for americanstoner.net

(Error code: sec_error_untrusted_issuer)

American Stoner? I guess it'll be a real buzz-kill if the copyright cops get them for possession with intent to distribute.

Re:demonoid.com still using invalid certificate (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45933217)

Maybe it's a U.S. based copier supply company.


 


  •  


     


    •  

Re:demonoid.com still using invalid certificate (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45933581)

Could they provide ink refill for a pen I got from penisland.com?

Re:demonoid.com still using invalid certificate (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45933687)

Could they provide ink refill for a pen I got from penisland.com?

For sure you can get a refill from comebuythegalleon.com, but be careful - it's a pirate site.

Re:demonoid.com still using invalid certificate (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45933671)

Technical Details

www.demonoid.com uses an invalid security certificate.

The certificate is not trusted because it is self-signed.

The certificate is only valid for americanstoner.net

(Error code: sec_error_untrusted_issuer)

demonoid.com (and demonoid.me) and americanstoner.net just happens to be hosted on the same server (hengill.orangewebsite.com) and that server doesn't seem to support SNI.

Nothing to see here. Move along...

Y u no install SNI? (1)

tepples (727027) | about a year ago | (#45933715)

demonoid.com [...] happens to be hosted on [a] server [that] doesn't seem to support SNI.

At least on the client side, every major desktop web browser supports SNI except for Internet Explorer on Windows XP. With security updates for Windows XP ending in three months anyway, why aren't more web server administrators installing SNI to use valuable IPv4 addresses more efficiently? (Disclosure: I moved my web site from another shared host to WebFaction about a year ago primarily to get SNI.)

You are a PIRATE! (1)

Noishkel (3464121) | about a year ago | (#45933083)

*whi-TISH!*

Demonoid sucked... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45933141)

It had all the problems of being a 'public' site. Shit seed ratios and all that low speed public leechers stuff. Crap descriptions. The same useless crud uploaded 50 times when a current active good version existed. No comments on the QUALITY of the files. Just completely useless "thanks for uploading" repeated for pages.

Along with all the drawbacks of being a 'private' site. Requires logins. Don't say anything to anyone important or you might find your account banned. Don't mouth off. Don't express unpleasant opinions on anything anywhere or you're gone. Offend the wrong person and you're gone.

Plus they had the habit of drawing unwanted attention to themselves as some sort of 'industry spokesman'. And nobody elected them to a damm thing.

I was glad to see it go. It was a kiddy site one tiny step up from the old malware ad infested 'warez' sites. It has been replaced and surpassed by far better sites now. And even the totally public pirate bay beats the crap out of them now.

Re:Demonoid sucked... (2)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45933221)

Demonoid had a treasure trove of rare files you could not find on other public OR private trackers let alone on USENET. So no, Demonoid was like no other file sharing site on the web. And the community is what made Demonoid great. Who care about the latest LOST or Intelligence tv episode ? But then you were looking for some rare comic or ebook the D was the place to go. I still have a lot of torrent files from Demonoid. Could never bring myself to delete them hopeing for a day when the tracker would come back online again. It seems that day has come. Long live the D and its superb community.

Re:Demonoid sucked... (2)

runeghost (2509522) | about a year ago | (#45933791)

Demonoid had a treasure trove of rare files you could not find on other public OR private trackers let alone on USENET. So no, Demonoid was like no other file sharing site on the web. And the community is what made Demonoid great. Who care about the latest LOST or Intelligence tv episode ? But then you were looking for some rare comic or ebook the D was the place to go. I still have a lot of torrent files from Demonoid. Could never bring myself to delete them hopeing for a day when the tracker would come back online again. It seems that day has come. Long live the D and its superb community.

Exactly this. Demonoid was like a torrent Library of Alexandria, and the whole human race was made poorer when it went down. It'll still be a long while before I'll trust the new one though.

Re:Demonoid sucked... (1)

nurb432 (527695) | about a year ago | (#45934151)

And plenty of obscure things that you couldn't buy if you wanted to. I agree, now we are stuck with 'top 40' type sties. ( or going underground )

But all that said, i don't trust them. This may be 100% legit, and the original founders have come back to life but at this stage of the game, i doubt that has happened.

Re:Demonoid sucked... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45934463)

If demonoid was such a treasure trove of rare and awesome files. And the community was just so great.

Then all those files should still live on and be perfectly downloadable today thru DHT.

Are they? No?

So the community wasn't that great. Nobody cared to seed after they couldn't get credit for doing so anymore.

And the files were not that special because nobody gave enough of a crap about them to continue seeding them into the DHT swarms.

Trackers are obsolete. As are dedicated sites that can be shut down and wipe out everything they had.

Re:Demonoid sucked... (0, Flamebait)

nohonor (450357) | about a year ago | (#45933427)

You suck.

Who cares? (2)

Karmashock (2415832) | about a year ago | (#45933797)

The tracker is the least important part of demonoid. The interesting bit was their website that had such a great catalog of stuff AND such a great system for search it.

SUB CATEGORIES! Oh man. There were so many sub categories. Which meant if you wanted something you could search just that sub category. Honestly, Amazon.com often has an inferior search system to what old Demoniod had.

If the resurrected the site but kept the tracker offline it would be nearly as good as the old days... assuming anyone ever used the new demoniod again.

D2 Site claims.. (4, Informative)

nurb432 (527695) | about a year ago | (#45934101)

Well, it knew my old login and password. So at least part of the database was there.

Still, no way to know any of these things are not an *AA honeypot now.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?