Comments on: Odex vs PacNet ruling

By: torrentz.com7

torrentz.com7 — Mon, 20 Jan 2014 06:21:18 +0000

This would have been a good sign, even as we had not anticipated to find quite
definitely fine gold inside stone. His fee was 110 guineas,
understanding that of the hotelkeeper was 30 guineas.
Neighbours were quite few, where there were only three other women living
in the neighbourhood – all lived either in bark huts or tents using young children.

By: AprÃ¨s Singapour, ODEX frappe en France | Bikasuishin

AprÃ¨s Singapour, ODEX frappe en France | Bikasuishin — Sun, 18 Nov 2007 22:15:22 +0000

[…] Ã©tÃ© ternie par ces procÃ©dÃ©s douteux. Lorsque le fournisseur d’accÃ¨s Pacific Internet a remportÃ© son procÃ¨s en premiÃ¨re instance contre ODEX qui exigeait la divulgation des informations personnelles des […]

By: Boon

Boon — Sat, 08 Sep 2007 15:54:47 +0000

Any way do odex obtain copy right of this animes to sue end users like to that we are actually infriging their copy right? what i heard that is they only have gundam seed. They cant just go around sueing people who is downloading animes

By: My 2 Cents’ Worth on the ODEX Saga « Difference: My Subtle Coherence

My 2 Cents’ Worth on the ODEX Saga « Difference: My Subtle Coherence — Thu, 30 Aug 2007 10:19:14 +0000

[…] – DarkMirage […]

By: John Law

John Law — Tue, 28 Aug 2007 15:11:09 +0000

At the end of the day, BayTSP (and probably other similar companies) are sending DMCA notices which claim that they detected a user uploading and downloading copyrighted files. This is a lie. They didn’t catch the user in the act of downloading. A lying tracker, a peer using peer exchange, hostile web page, or buggy BitTorrent client could all result in a false DMCA notice.

If your ISP forwards a DMCA notice from these guys, point them here. This research suggests that they have no evidence of wrong-doing. If ISPs learn that the folks sending them DMCA notices are not being completely honest, they may be willing to reconsider their position about how they respond to the notices. The people I work with at Carnegie Mellon seemed willing to reevaluate their policies given this evidence. I believe that ISPs should require that any peer-to-peer related DMCA notice include a statement regarding exactly what evidence of sharing was found. Ideally, the notice should contain evidence that could be corroborated with log files (for example, “we found that the client at 123.1.2.3 uploaded 1 MB of file X to 4.3.2.1”. The ISP may be able to check that there was 1 MB of traffic between these two clients).

A piece of good news for anybody who has gotten a bittorrent related notice from BayTSP: it doesn’t seem like a studio could do much in terms of court action with the evidence BayTSP gives them.

For the technically minded, I though I’d share some observations of the behavior of BayTSP’s clients

BayTSP’s clients don’t don’t accept incoming connections, only send outgoing ones. I wonder what exactly this is for.
Some of the BayTSP clients claim to be using Azureus (and support Azureus extensions), while others run libtorrent. I’m not sure why they are doing this
When BayTSP’s clients connect to a BT user, they claim to not have downloaded any of the file, but refuse uploads. Not only does this behavior not make any sense for an actual user, but it seems like BayTSP would want to accept data, which might provide proof of infringement.
Some of the IP ranges I noticed coming from BayTSP were: 154.37.66.xx, 63.216.76.xx, 216.133.221.xx. Sometimes, they make themselves really obvious on the tracker. For example, 154.37.66.xx and 63.216.76.xx will send 10 clients to the same tracker all claiming to listen on port 12320. Maybe trackers should block these folks

http://bmaurer.blogspot.com/2007/02/big-media-dmca-notices-guilty-until.html

By: leefe

leefe — Tue, 28 Aug 2007 10:33:33 +0000

this piqued me quite alot.. hearing singnet just gave up the list easily the other time… nao pacnet proved that they do value customer privacy i think i’d want to switch ISPs…

By: babesonwheels

babesonwheels — Tue, 28 Aug 2007 05:54:05 +0000

No matter how you look at it, odex is finished for real.

If odex were to win the pacnet case, it would keep on sending fine letters to anime downloaders and effectively stunt the growth of anime community in singapore. More people would despise odex. Which would all reflect in odex’s sales.

If odex were to lose the case, this means odex possess neither legal means nor credibility in the first place to make downloaders pay up the fine. One can expect to see no ebbing in anime downloads, in fact it’s likely to rise. And the tarnished image of odex would forever be engraved in the mind of anime community and singaporean citizens alike. No one’s going to buy their products.

By: quendidil

quendidil — Tue, 28 Aug 2007 03:36:49 +0000

Also the whole BayTSP situation sounds a bit fishy. Did Odex in fact pay BayTSP to track down downloaders? If they did why didn’t they produce an affidavit from the guy at BayTSP?

By: TP

TP — Mon, 27 Aug 2007 19:29:10 +0000

I think this just proves that litigation is the only way to beat these crappy ISPs into submission. Heaven forbids such a litigatious society.

That said, I’m also considering terminating my Singnet connection, given the above mentioned fact. I’m so not considering paying the termination fee, for the above mentioned reason: either they terminate me for free, or I can send a lawyer to court to do this.

(BTW, it seemed to me that litigations are the way to go in the future of Singapore. GG, everybody.)

By: El

El — Mon, 27 Aug 2007 14:41:36 +0000

Well.I know which ISP to subscribe to once my contract with Singnet expires. Crap speed, crap customer service, now crap customer privacy policy too.