Re: [tor-relays] DMCA letters

["Steve Snyder" <swsnyder@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Relevant?

"Often referred to as copyright trolling, speculative invoicing involves sending hundreds or thousands of demand letters alleging copyright infringement and seeking thousands of dollars in compensation. Those cases rarely â if ever â go to court as the intent is simply to scare enough people into settling in order to generate a profit."

http://yro.slashdot.org/story/13/03/12/1449244/canadian-file-sharing-plaintiff-admits-to-copyright-trolling


On Tuesday, March 12, 2013 9:31am, "Matt Joyce" <toradmin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> said:

> _______________________________________________
> tor-relays mailing list
> tor-relays@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays
> I think you have probably gotten unlucky here in all honesty given the
> traffic you are pushing over there and having an issue so early on don't
> take it as an indication of expected rates either, I use the recommended
> reduced exit policy on both of my relays on is 20Mbit capacity and has
> been running about 6 months, I've yet to receive anything in the way of
> DMCA or abuse complaints about that one as yet, the newest one is a
> large relay which has actually been running just one day less than your
> one over there, however it's sitting on a 1Gbps connection and as of
> today averaging on the order of around 219.40 Mbit/s (110Mbit each
> direction) having transferred 16.45TiB, in the two weeks since it was
> first activated, the rate has been rising most of that time such that
> 1.87TiB of that transfer was yesturday, 2.21TiB is the estimate for
> today.  I'm so glad it's unmetered xD.
> 
> You can see the traffic stats for it on the relay info page at
> http://torexit2.mttjocy.co.uk/ I hope that helps at least to settle some
> of your concerns that it might scale linearly, were it to do so then
> this bandwidth would be producing them at rate approximately 20 times
> more frequently or around 40 per 16 days ~2.5 letters a day which is
> significantly higher than the 0 actually received.
> 
> So it's either unfortunate luck on your part of they are doing a lot
> more careful checking before sending their random notes out than they
> appear to be and figured out that I'm not the type to scare easy if they
> even had a case let alone when they are blowing smoke.  But I would
> highly doubt that unless they are burning a few hundred doing a detailed
> background check that would actually pick up something like minor civil
> settlements before sending any notices it's not something you would find
> on a casual google, and if they *were* doing that yet apparently still
> not coming up with the simple idea of err type the IP address into
> google and don't waste your time and money when it comes back saying
> it's a tor exit node well that would be going beyond stupid to be fair.
> 
> On 12/03/13 07:41, jvoss@xxxxxxxxxx wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I've been running a Tor exit node on my new server for 16 days. Today I received
>> my second automated DMCA infringement notice from HBO. I sent them the
>> boilerplate you see at the bottom of the message both times. My colo provider
>> Hurricane Electric understands Tor, which is awesome. I don't think it'll be an
>> issue, so I'm happy with this. I'm wondering if anyone receives a large number of
>> DMCA infringement notices and whether there was a resolution. It would certainly
>> make my life a little bit more difficult to send more than one of these per week.
>> When I got my first letter I was pushing 5 Mbps (megabits) and now I'm pushing 9
>> Mbps. I've set the RelayBandwidthRate to 5120 KB which should give a max rate of
>> 41 Mbps. If infringement notices increases linearly with traffic, this could
>> become an issue.
>>
>> I'm happy to share the infringement notices if anyone is interested.
>>
>> I followed a few of the tips from https://blog.torproject.org/running-exit-node ,
>> I got a separate IP address and I reduced the exit policy. I plan to update the
>> reverse dns. I don't feel like reducing the exit policy does anything because
>> BitTorrent was designed to run on any high port. Also, reducing the exit policy
>> blocks researchers who are doing port scans and header grabbing over Tor. That's
>> a point of contention for me because I know legitimate researchers use Tor for
>> that purpose. Does anyone have any data or anecdotes on how exit policy affects
>> malicious use of Tor vs legitimate use of Tor?
>>
>> Btw, my server is 216.218.134.12. I'm running a patched version of tor 0.2.3.25
>> which fixes a few bugs I found in buffer events. See
>> https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/7788 for more info. Uptime is now
>> 6 days, 13 days without a crash.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Javantea
>>
>> -------------------
>>
>> Dear Andrew Martin:
>>
>> The IP address in question is a Tor exit node.
>> https://www.torproject.org/overview.html
>>
>> There is little we can do to trace this matter further. As can be seen
>> from the overview page, the Tor network is designed to make tracing of
>> users impossible. The Tor network is run by some 2500 volunteers who
>> use the free software provided by the Tor Project to run Tor routers.
>> Client connections are routed through multiple relays, and are
>> multiplexed together on the connections between relays. The system
>> does not record logs of client connections or previous hops.
>>
>> This is because the Tor network is a censorship resistance, privacy,
>> and anonymity system used by whistle blowers, journalists, Chinese
>> dissidents skirting the Great Firewall, abuse victims, stalker
>> targets, the US military, and law enforcement, just to name a few.
>> See https://www.torproject.org/about/torusers.html.en for more info.
>>
>> Unfortunately, some people misuse the network. However, compared to
>> the rate of legitimate use (the IP address in question processes
>> approximately 11 megabits of traffic per second), abuse complaints are
>> rare.
>> https://www.torproject.org/docs/faq-abuse.html.en
>>
>> This is the second e-mail from you that I am replying to. The only
>> thing that has changed is that I have increased the bandwidth to 9
>> megabits per second.
>>
>> If you have further questions, feel free to contact me at
>>  ------------
>>
>> Sincerely,
>>  -----------
>> _______________________________________________
>> tor-relays mailing list
>> tor-relays@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays
> 
> 
> 


_______________________________________________
tor-relays mailing list
tor-relays@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays