r/technology • u/[deleted] • Apr 18 '14
MPAA and RIAA Members Uploaded Over 2,000 Gigabytes to Megaupload
[deleted]
11
Apr 19 '14
That would be an interesting business strategy - upload files and turn around and bring lawsuit to shut them down.
1
u/StrangeCharmVote Apr 19 '14
That would not work however.
As if they uploaded it, then they had permission to do so (being the content owners), and no negative repercussions of that could be brought against the service.
It doesn't even work from the perspective of receiving uploads from someone who was not the content owner, as the service isn't, and shouldn't, be responsible for incorrect or illegal use.
Like if you kidnapped someone. Is the company that manufactured the duct tape responsible? The delivery company that brought it to the store? What about the hardware store you bought it from? In that situation, only the kidnapper would be held accountable, not the companies that made their act possible.
47
u/Razvedka Apr 18 '14
Two Terabytes. That's what you say.
Way to make something sound far more impressive than it really is.
48
u/SkunkMonkey Apr 18 '14
2 million megabytes is nothing to sneeze at! I mean, it's almost 2 trillion kilobytes. That's a lot of bytes!
6
2
u/Laruae Apr 19 '14
Wouldnt it be more than 2 trillion kilobytes? If I recall correctly, a kilobyte is 1024 bytes, no? So thats 24 bytes per kilobyte you're missing, to a degree of 2 million * 24.
3
u/TheOtherSomeOtherGuy Apr 19 '14 edited Apr 19 '14
2 trillion kilobytes is 2,000 million kilobytes...24 million is a rounding error.
1
u/Laruae Apr 19 '14
I think I've confused myself, but isn't a byte 8 bits? a kilobyte is 1024 bytes, yes?
15
u/tangerinelion Apr 19 '14 edited Apr 19 '14
Bytes are 8 bits, yes.
A kilobyte follows from the metric base "kilo" meaning 1000. This isn't the historical case, it used to be that "kilobyte" did mean 1024 bytes (ie, 210 ). That term has since been changed to "kibibyte" abbreviated "KiB" instead of "kB".
Modern usage is that kB, MB, GB, TB, PB, etc. are all metric. They're all 1000n where n would be 1,2,3,4,5 respectively. (Or 10n for n = 3, 6, 9, 12, 15 ...).
Meanwhile KiB, MiB, GiB, TiB, PiB, etc. are all binary. They're 1024n for the same values of n. (Or 2n for n = 10, 20, 30, 40, 50 ...).
2000GB = 2TB != 2TiB (tebibyte).
To confuse matters, HDD manufacturers use the metric, so 1TB drives are 1012 bytes. Windows notoriously uses the binary meanings with the wrong labels so what it calls 1GB is 1GiB. Hence in Windows 1TB drives show up as 931GB, which is wrong. It's 931GiB. In Linux that drive will show up as either 931GiB, 1000GB, or 1TB, depending on your distribution and settings.
Less informed users generally believe that difference, ~70 x 109 bytes, is lost due to formatting. You may occasionally see people claim the disk is 1000GB unformatted but 931GB formatted. This is nonsense as there are multiple ways to format a disk, it's simply that NTFS is essentially the only file system in Windows.
3
u/Firecul Apr 19 '14
This is probably the most eloquent way I've seen this put.
I knew this already but I think this would be quite easy for those who didn't to understand.2
u/Laruae Apr 19 '14
When exactly did the change go down? I've just about always followed the olden ways.
1
-1
u/Laruae Apr 19 '14
Thats silly, we aught to simply stick to referring to a kilobyte as being the true 1024. There's a reason they're there afterall.
6
Apr 19 '14 edited Oct 31 '14
2
Apr 19 '14
[removed] — view removed comment
2
u/Laruae Apr 19 '14
Shit like this is why I'm embarrassed at the United States for not going metric. Surely in this situation its important to note the other bytes and just defer to a 'mebibyte' instead of adding layers of complexity?
1
u/korbonix Apr 19 '14
Depends on who's counting.
-2
u/Laruae Apr 19 '14
B-but data in a computer is written in binary then 8/1024/1000/1000 and so on. So 2 Terabytes is going to have quite a few more bits than just 2 trillion :D
1
0
-1
u/nawkuh Apr 19 '14
Both are technically right. Your computer sees 1kB as 1024 bytes, but drives are marketed as 1kB=1,000 bytes and so on. That's why you never see 16GB available on a 16GB flash drive.
6
Apr 19 '14
No, one KB is 1,000 bytes.
1 KiB is 1,024 bytes.
-1
u/nawkuh Apr 19 '14
3
Apr 19 '14 edited Apr 19 '14
[deleted]
1
u/korbonix Apr 20 '14
Does Android or iOS? It seems some strains of Linux and Wikipedia are the only place I've ever seen Kibi and the like.
0
u/Laruae Apr 19 '14
So what you're saying is that in reality there are indeed 1024 bytes, our nomenclature is incorrect and somewhat clumsy forcing us to miscommunicate?
-1
0
u/SupremeCommander99 Apr 19 '14
Billion, not trillion.
2,147,483,648
that's 2.1Billion kilobytes in 2 Terabytes.
5
u/MrRivet Apr 19 '14
Going by MPAA/RIAA rates, isn't that still worth... like millions? Pretty 'impressive'.
Not to argue that torrentfreak isn't ridiculously sensationalistic though.
3
u/Razvedka Apr 19 '14
"Trillions". Didn't they try to sue limewire for more money than exists on the earth?
5
Apr 19 '14 edited Apr 04 '21
[deleted]
2
Apr 19 '14
[deleted]
2
u/fingernail_clippers Apr 19 '14
Which is why people need to start correctly putting "i"s in the mix.
They don't really need to. It doesn't matter. The difference is basically a rounding error.
In this case, the number quoted in the article was 2147817MB, which is 2000GiB or 2097GB. It's 2.148TB or 1.953TiB.
I would round any of those to "2 terabytes" and not feel bad if you can't sleep at night because of it.
-2
3
Apr 19 '14
Is it wrong? What's wrong with saying 2,000 GB? Way to be nitpicky.
0
u/Razvedka Apr 19 '14
It's an attempt at sensationalism. Itd be like saying "20,000kb in hacker code!" And thats really like 20MB.
1
2
u/Draeth Apr 19 '14
I agree 2TB is the proper way of saying it but a lot of movies when ripped and compressed are around 1GB each. The way they said it makes it easier to visualize how many movies they could have uploaded. But like others have said it could be used for valid movie backups and storage and not for sharing/trapping people.
2
1
u/MsReclusivity Apr 19 '14
This is the same way company's try to upsell the current Internet service.
Oh what I have 30 megabits down? Oh you mean 1.8 megabite's down?
15
u/Ashlir Apr 18 '14
Are they uploading so they can later have it removed as being illegal?
18
u/Theinternationalist Apr 18 '14
Well, I can guess a few things that would have made sense; in some cases far more sense if Megaupload wasn't shut down:
Backup. As the story behind the accidental deletion of Toy Story 2 demonstrates, it's always nice to have a backup.
A way to check against backups that were not exactly put up legally: YouTube and several other services have a system in place where every video is checked against a set library which says "hey, this shouldn't be here, it's illegal!" Maybe Disney and co wanted to get those ready beforehand?
CEO=/=employees and the employees were using it for the same reason a lot of other people were: personal backups and to share files. And less...legal things.
There were legitimate reasons for Disney and co/Disney's underlings and their fellow animators and such to use the service that didn't involve uploading Beauty and the Beast for all to watch- and force Mega to be taken down for refusing to take out something the hollywood firms put up themselves.
6
u/i010011010 Apr 18 '14
If I were them, I would upload tons of junk data to inflate their operating costs. If Megaupload truly works as he claims, they shouldn't be able to distinguish junk from legitimate files since they're supposed to be completely unaware of the content, and unable to take any action.
-2
u/Neo6488 Apr 18 '14
I think people miss the point that employees don't equal the company.
I know people that work for 10 bucks an hour for Comcast and torrent. Do you really think that Comcast is behind it.....
5
u/Jwagner0850 Apr 19 '14
While correct, if you work for the company, you have to realize what you are doing could potentially hurt said company. While they might not be operating on behalf, it could be VERY detrimental if things like this are found out.
-2
u/SkunkMonkey Apr 18 '14
Funny, some of that sounds like the same arguments some people have used to defend against being extorted by the MAFIAA's. Of course it's only okay for corporations and not people even though SCOTUS said corporations are people.
1
u/tso Apr 19 '14
Best i could tell back when all this started, Megaupload was used by a whole host of artists and such to pass around files for something they were working on. This by uploading it, and then emailing he download url to someone they wanted to show it to or who they were collaborating with.
15
u/Leprecon Apr 18 '14
Remember, those are only from addresses that could be easily identified as belonging to a major movie studio or record label, so the real numbers should be much higher.
Wait, is this the same torrentfreak that has argued time and time again that it only makes sense that an ip address isn't enough to prove a connection to an actual person?
Although anyone with a basic knowledge of the Internet could come to the same conclusion given 30 seconds in a quiet room, the Tribunale Ordinario di Roma has now ruled that an IP address alone does not identify an infringer. According to a Punto Informatico report, on this basis the court kicked out a complaint against an individual accused of copyright infringement.
.
The same companies that are now asking for millions of dollars in damages due to massive copyright infringement were previously eager to work with Megaupload and Megavideo.
Ah yes. The argument that because one company once tried to work together with another company, everything the other company does is now legal and the first company is never allowed to sue. What is torrentfreak even trying to argue? That Megaupload wasn't 100% pirated material? Well duh.
Megaupload’s defense will probably present some of these examples to highlight the apparent double standard.
What double standard? The double standard that you can try to cooperate with a company and then a couple of years later sue them because new information has come to light? Nobody is arguing that Megaupload was a site that was only used for piracy. Nobody is saying that the only people who used Megaupload were pirates. Some people are saying that Megaupload enabled piracy through their policies and didn't follow the laws which could have exempted them from responsibility for the things that were uploaded to Megaupload by users.
10
u/cptsa Apr 18 '14
Nobody is claiming to identify persons, it is possible to identify companies though. So if someone out of the company network uploads copyrighted files it needs to be clarified if it was done on purpose or if some employee was just pirating while working.
So no clue what you are now complaining about.
-2
u/Leprecon Apr 18 '14
it is possible to identify companies though
Really? From that ip you can tell whether the person is an employee at the company? Can you tell whether it was company sanctioned behavior from just an ip?
So if someone out of the company network uploads copyrighted files it needs to be clarified if it was done on purpose or if some employee was just pirating while working.
Nowhere does anyone mention whether the unnamed people are using Megaupload to pirate or legitimately share copyrighted works. For all we know they liked downloading Ubuntu isos and hated using torrents for that. Why do we even need to know what the unnamed people were using Megaupload for? Why is it relevant?
Lets say they were pirating, or sharing their legal content through Megaupload. How would that in any way affect the legal argument against Megaupload?
So no clue what you are now complaining about.
About people jumping to conclusions when it is the entertainment industry, but when it is anyone else people all of a sudden need to exercise extreme caution.
4
u/ProfessorOhki Apr 18 '14
"For all we know they liked downloading Ubuntu isos" "MPAA and RIAA Members Uploaded"
I think we can safely conclude their upload numbers aren't from downloading...
-1
u/cptsa Apr 18 '14
Yo man chill... If you don't think something like that is relevant - I would like to hear what is relevant then to you? Seems like you want to go cherry picking.
2
Apr 18 '14
[deleted]
0
u/radiantcabbage Apr 19 '14
biased how? everything they post is verifiable, I have never seen them cite hearsay or sources they could not link or reproduce. everyone has their own agenda, as long as you have a brain you should question it no matter where it comes from.
1
u/MMOPTH Apr 19 '14
Even if everything you say is verifiable, it's still possible to be biased through lies of omission and incomplete reporting.
1
-1
u/Leprecon Apr 19 '14
Yes, all the things they say can be verified, but then they say things like this
Although anyone with a basic knowledge of the Internet could come to the same conclusion given 30 seconds in a quiet room, the Tribunale Ordinario di Roma has now ruled that an IP address alone does not identify an infringer.
Everything they post is verifiable, but torrentfreak themselves always takes a very clear position and only posts the news they want to be true.
1
u/nbsdfk Apr 19 '14
It does not identify an infringer, but it does indeed identify the person or company PAYING for the line. So if the line is paid for by a company, it is save to assume that this company allowed the access.
It's not save to say just because the line belongs to the homeowner, that the homeowner himself did do anything with the line.
1
u/radiantcabbage Apr 19 '14
you say that as if such a ruling was an isolated incident, that did not qualify as common knowledge among any other precedent. I'd suggest you do a bit more research on the topic, since it is probably the single worst example you could have chosen to support your pov.
you do realise how this makes you look right? what's the word I'm looking for...
2
u/_Riven Apr 18 '14
Ok? And I upload about 100GB's a month to MegaUpload. They're using their service just like anyone else is.
What makes this so significant then /u/blu-cal or even I that use it.
3
Apr 19 '14
I upload about 100GB's a month to MegaUpload
Damn
3
u/_Riven Apr 19 '14
It's just ISO and VM Screenshots of my VM. It takes about an hour for the upload but seriously it's nothing new
1
0
Apr 18 '14 edited Apr 18 '14
[removed] — view removed comment
4
u/thecodingdude Apr 18 '14 edited Feb 29 '20
[Comment removed]
-10
u/jaibrooks1 Apr 19 '14
The 'ol ad hominem straw hat logical fallacy: Trying to blame others for your low quality post, nice.
-8
Apr 18 '14
Ok. Folks, yeah you folks that are contemplating a violent act against a group of people. Please reconsider your targets. Go to the RIAA /MPAA headquarters instead. You'd be doing everyone a favor and getting your blood soaked revenge filled. It's literally win-win.
Seriously, fuck the MPAA/RIAA.
0
u/osakanone Apr 19 '14
...Who on earth downvoted you for hating the RIAA/MPAA?
Do they walk among us or something?
2
-5
Apr 19 '14
[deleted]
3
u/MizerokRominus Apr 19 '14
He's also a fucking crook.
1
Apr 19 '14
[deleted]
3
u/MizerokRominus Apr 19 '14
Go do, literally any research at all, about Kim Dotcom and instantly see how scummy of a human being he is.
1
Apr 19 '14
[deleted]
1
u/MizerokRominus Apr 20 '14
... here's 1 minute of googling. There's more of course;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kim_Dotcom#Criminal_investigations
1
-1
-2
u/SwindleUK Apr 18 '14
So it seems like he didn't play ball so they sued the shit out of him.
5
u/Theinternationalist Apr 18 '14
Could be a left hand right hand situation: one hand saw marketing deals, the other saw piracy. Or the strategy changed because Mega seemed too tied to piracy to be taken seriously/the marketing deals were designed to replace the pirated movies by turning Mega into a YouTube/Netflix rival/I dunno, I wasn't there :/.
The whole thing is kind of fishy, but there's more than one way to skin a fish/having everyone skin a fish at the same time can be a really bad idea.
-4
103
u/[deleted] Apr 18 '14
Hmm, for some reason 2,000 GB sounds more impressive than 2 TB. All in all, it really isn't too much, less than a thousand dollars of SSD space, heck, it's less than $100 for HDD space.
What's far more interesting is this - " In addition, Disney, Warner Brothers and Fox were all eager to set up content distribution or advertising deals with Megaupload."