Wonder if they’ll actually be investigating the IPs of computers that visit the site now that it’s taken down. If so, wonder what their reaction will be when they see a couple hundred hits coming from a Canadian government institution once I’m done opening it on every computer here.

LMAO @ Pirate Mike trying to FUD this out as much as possible without even having basic facts. We all know that you don’t actually need the facts to form your opinions. Working backwards certainly simplifies life, doesn’t it, chubby?

What you are missing Mike is this is the knock on effects of piracy at the basic level.

The music is “ripped” from CD or other sources. It becomes a pirate copy, posted on a file locker or streaming audio site. The blogs, intentionally or not embed it into their sites. If the original songs were not pirated and put up, the blogs themselves would likely never actually rip and publish.

They are operating on the (dangerous) principal that “the other guy” has the rights to put the music up, so they are working from it.

Simple question: Do you honestly think these blogs had a license or were paying licensing fees to distribute music or have musical performance on their sites?

I don’t think so.

Example?

“01. Sean Paul ? Got 2 Luv U (Feat. Alexis Jordan)
02. Eminem & Royce Da 59 Ft Bruno Mars ? Lighters
03. Brandy ? I Don?t Care
04. QWOTE F. RICK ROSS ? I WANT YOU
05. Drake ? Marvins Room
06. Wynter Gordon ? Rumba (feat. Kevin Mccall)
07. Verse Simmonds Ft. Kelly Rowland ? Boo Thang
08. Kelly Rowland Feat. Busta Rhymes, Fabolous & Trey Songz ? Motivation (Remix)
09. Rebstar ft. Drake & Rock City ? Good Life (Prod. Boi-1da & T-Minus)
10. Tyga feat. Chris Brown ? Snapback Back
11. Joe Jonas ? See No More
12. DJ Khaled ft Fabolous, Jadakiss & Mary J Blige ? It Ain?t Over Til It?s Over (No Tags)
13. Beyonce ? Dance For You
14. Corey Chorus ? Stumblin
15. Git Fresh ? Jump Off (Prod. by Blackout) (Official Version)
16. DJ Noodles ? Everyday Allday (Dirty)
17. Pitbull ? Took My Love (Feat. Red Foo, Vein & David Rush)
18. David Guetta Ft. Taio Cruz & Ludacris ? Little Bad Girl (Mastered)
19. Jackie Boyz ? Memory (feat. Christina Milian)
20. Jagged Edge ? When The Bed Shakes

Download
View the full tracklist and download links by clicking the link below.
Read the rest of this entry ?

Do you honestly think that this site was legal? Are you suggesting that law enforcement should NOT go after a pirate site in the same manner that it would go after a pirate selling product on the street or at a flea market, example?

Is online that special that the laws just don’t apply?

What the legality of the website in question has to do with jurisdiction issues raised?

Wait, is this a genuine troll or an ironic fake troll? I can’t tell.

Which part of the “pirate selling product on the street or at a flea market” did this site mimic?

I mean, if this site was illegal in the UK, which gives the UK the right to take it down, I’m sure China can find something illegal (according to Chinese law) that’s posted on Facebook.

That’ll be fun.

Yeah, it’s hard to tell these days – so I just assume they’re all fake. Occam’s razor suggests that there are too few people this stupid for them to be real more often than not.

They put a link at the bottom of the page to a “legal” music site. Except it’s not a link, and you have to copy and paste it.
I guess they weren’t able to find the “Insert Hyperlink” button in whatever HTML editor they used to make that page.

SOCA – Serious Organised Crime Agency

I wonder sometimes if the UK government is aware of people laughing at those type of names.

Looking at all of this, I’d have to say that SOCA is definitely a joke.

Would the site still work if using Blockaid.me’s DNS?

I love this lie they posted.

“The music industry wants the advances technology brings, but does not want that technology abused at the expense of a whole industry. From the Edison cylinder, through vinyl, tape and the CD, to the MP3 file, the music industry has embraced new forms and new ideas and is doing so more than ever before and faster than other ‘content’ industries.”

Embracing new technologies?

Should be stated “dragged kicking and screaming to use the new technologies because they don’t understand how they work”.

this one was the best.
“The real problem is that the music industry wants to stop the advance of technology.”

The music industry wants the advances technology brings, but does not want that technology abused at the expense of a whole industry. From the Edison cylinder, through vinyl, tape and the CD, to the MP3 file, the music industry has embraced new forms and new ideas and is doing so more than ever before and faster than other ‘content’ industries.

“None of the money from online sales goes to the artist anyway.”

Record companies pay artists royalties on sales of downloads in the same way as for sales of CDs.

“It’s the record companies’ fault for not getting their artists’ tracks online quickly enough.”

While it is very easy for anyone to upload an MP3 music file onto the net and give it away for nothing, what takes time is to do so in such a way that the online product is tracked through the process, with the artists, publishers, record companies, third party retailers all being paid their share.

i like how every answer has the artist first.

For all we know they could have been arrested for fraud that was entirely unrelated to whatever copyright issues may have been involved with the site.

This whole business just seems so bizarre though.

What you think AC, quite frankly, doesn’t matter.

It’s what the facts show. Do you have facts/evidence that they DID NOT pay licensing fees?

Cause if not, it sort of falls under the “innocent UNTIL proven guilty” thing. Which is kind of the point. The site was just seized under the assumption everything there was illegal. Which kind of ignores due process and all that.

Also, Mike hasn’t suggested any of what you’re implying he’s suggested. Nor has he stated that this site was legal or not.

He’s merely pointing out the facts as they relate to the message left on the site. Nothing more, nothing less.

Then, he’s pointing out how we can’t quite know what was or wasn’t going on one way or another without there being some kind of trial where, you know, evidence is presented showing the site was clearing committing copyright infringement or wasn’t committing copyright.

No one’s saying online is that special that the laws just don’t apply. In fact, point to the contrary, Mike is pointing out that the laws SHOULD still apply, particularly in regards to the claims being made by the message on the site (claims that are in fact, contrary to actual law) and again, due process should be followed entirely before the seizure was made.

Are you that big a troll that somehow you of all people just know everything that is illegally happening (in regards to copyright infringement) all over the world without actually being presented any facts/evidence? Are you psychic? Can you predict the future? Tomorrow’s Wednesday, one of the Lotto nights locally. Can you give me the numbers that are going to come up? Pretty please. Here, if it helps, “Bad ol’ Mike! Questioning the legality of such a seizure and pointing out misinformation left behind to scare people. Who do you think you are? Some kind of person who follows and knows the law?! For shame, Mike. For shame.” (That last part in quotes is all complete sarcasm on my part, for those who are wondering.)

I am confused, since it is an Serious Organised Crime Agency, it is just a government backed crime syndicate that never has fun?

10 years in jail? Dont think so, cos its a civil offence. So mike is right, its clumsy intimidatory bullshit.

Also who is more disgusting as a person, someone who espouses a view because they believe it or someone who espouses a view because they are paid to? Ill let you think about that one, shill.

Probably not. On the other hand, it does only say domain names and not servers so the ip is probably still active. If it registered to another domain name then it is probably still chugging right a long.

Every time they do this, they just encourage for distributed DNS where there is no domain registry service.

Are you SURE that they’ll get their day in court?

Dajaz1 NEVER got a day in court and it took a YEAR before they were given it back without so much as an apology.

No, we’re not defending pirates…

We’re defending people who have been accused.

Innocent until proven guilty, remember?

Know what that means?

Of course you don’t, you assume everyone’s a pirate and therefore guilty.

It’s better to let a guilty man walk free than put an innocent man behind bars.

Of course, you can’t see that.

Maybe I should try again.
Other posts go through, but each time I try this one, it seems to get held in moderation.

I contacted SOCA, rang the wrong number actually and called the press office rather than the number for the general public.

I wanted to just get confirmation that they warning on the site did in fact come from SOCA, they confirmed that it did.

you cannot rule over innocent men; best to make them all guilty of something

“It’s what the facts show. Do you have facts/evidence that they DID NOT pay licensing fees?”

I went and looked. Most of the stuff they had on their site was on “file locker” sites, or uploaded locally on their site. Clearly, if they were paying a license for the content, they wouldn’t be the subject of legal action. I take the legal action as an indication that they MIGHT be operating illegally, and I see nothing on the site to suggest that the music was licensed in any manner.

“Also, Mike hasn’t suggested any of what you’re implying he’s suggested. Nor has he stated that this site was legal or not.”

What Mike did was pick apart a message by taking it in one way, and in doing so attempt to make a mockery of the legal action taken. Yet, each of the statements made on the site are factual.

Let’s look at Mike’s points:

1 – Seizure of the domain is no different in a legal sense than issuing a warrant to seize a vehicle or other used in a crime. Not much more to it. That it was used to conduct business in the UK should be enough for the deal.

2 – The big red warning is correct. The maximum penalty under UK law for certain types of copyright violations is 10 years. Mike doesn’t like the wording, but it is factual.

3 – word games. The music was used without license, without permission, etc. “stolen” is a nice word that covers what is a longer explanation. Get over it.

4 – Displaying the IP is a scare tactic, a clear indication to those who do not realize that they are leaving pretty big footprints everywhere they go.

5 – SOCA can look at all of the information provided by your browser as it related to that visit, and can correlate that information to any other site that they have access to. So yes, the can monitor your activities as it relates to these sites.

6 – If young emerging artists are unable to get funding for their releases because the records labels don’t have as much money to invest, then yes, their careers can be hurt.

7 – considering that the music industry is down 58% in sales of recorded music since the dawn of Napster, the argument is pretty easy to support.

They key here is when you look at most of the items, it’s Mike’s talking points at work again, trying to justify piracy.

The problem isn’t the SOCA notice. The problem is people making an excuse for piracy.

Well BlockAid doesn’t update immediately. The site seems to have been hosted in Switzerland but the servers appear to be down. RIPE’s IP database still shows the owner’s contact info and not SOCA’s.

46.19.137.76 – 46.19.137.79
46.19.139.28 – 46.19.139.31

WOAH! WOAH! WOAH!

What the hell?!

Music industry is DOWN 58%?!

Since when?!

Last I heard, there was more music being made today, more sales all over the place, more artists getting noticed, ect.

OH, wait, I get it now!

You’re confusing RECORD SALES with total sales such as iTunes, concert sales and other stuff.

*Rolls up a paper*

Bad, shill. *Whaps you with the paper* Bad. No cookie after dinner tonight for you, young man. Now go outside and think about the lie you just told.

No. Unlike you, I care about everyone’s rights. I don’t think it’s OK for someone–say you–to decide that some rights are worth protecting and some rights can be shit on. Only psychopaths like Mike think that way.

Don’t know about any other details, But SOCA did confirm that the warning page @ rnbxclusive.com was genuine.

Unlimited fines for browsing to a web page?

There needs to be a law against maliciously giving bad legal advice by a “professional” company.

“the blogs themselves would likely never actually rip and publish.”

The blogs don’t “rip and publish”.
They link.
Are you technologically-illiterate as well as generally-stupid, boy?

GoDaddy are still showing the domain as registered to a UK individual,rather than SOCA (http://who.godaddy.com/whoischeck.aspx?Domain=RNBXCLUSIVE.COM).

The domain is resolving to what appears to be a Rackspace server in northern England (thank you whatismyipaddress.com): the GoDaddy entry lists Rackspace nameservers, so I’d guess this is the original rnbxclusive server rather than a SOCA box.

It looks like “SOCA has taken control of this domain name” means “SOCA has taken control of this server”, which would explain the apparent paradox of a UK agency seizing a US domain.

SOCA has had little good press and a fair bit of criticism in its five or six years of operation, and is due to be binned in favour of a new National Crime Agency next year.

I have the same problem with ICE seizing sites as I do with the UK seizing sites. Since they are a country with their own laws, just as the US, how can it be that without ever setting foot in their country you are somehow liable under their laws?

This holds up no better with the US than with UK when dealing with the internet that has no national boundaries. It lays open a possible of nation shopping for the worst of the worst laws as the place to attempt enforcement at, all while no one has ever proven anything beyond a claim.

This lack of oversight and lack of public input has directly resulted in the recent protests over ACTA in the EU. It will again explode in their faces with this little maneuver.

But they don’t have to worry about me taking music through piracy. I want nothing to do with such business that act this way and will not finance them through purchases. Count me out as a customer nor or later in these sorts of businesses. I don’t like how they operate. My money is mine to chose where I spend it.

I am pretty sure it is still there since i clicked it to unhide it. This simply gives the people the option of reading the BS or not.

Plus last I checked Techdirt was a private entity that can choose to censor or not censor as they please, you always have the ability to go to another forum to state your opinion.

Not all cases go to court…

“Not enough evidence to support our claims, here’s your site back, it’s been over a year, no hard feelings, right?”

“What the hell?!

Music industry is DOWN 58%?!

Since when?!”

Sales of recorded music, including digital are down 58% since from 2000 to 2009. That includes Itunes, Amazon, and every other legal music retail source out there.

Concert sales? We have already debunked that one repeatedly, showing how a 4 fold increase in ticket costs for major acts is covering up for the idea of a true increase.

You know what is bad? Falling for Mike’s shit hook line and sinker!

“I went and looked. Most of the stuff they had on their site was on “file locker” sites, or uploaded locally on their site. Clearly, if they were paying a license for the content, they wouldn’t be the subject of legal action. I take the legal action as an indication that they MIGHT be operating illegally, and I see nothing on the site to suggest that the music was licensed in any manner.”

That means absolutely positively nothing. Artists, Managers and even the major labels often send music out to blogs using the very same file lockers. There is absolutely nothing clear about it.

“3 – word games. The music was used without license, without permission, etc. “stolen” is a nice word that covers what is a longer explanation. Get over it.”

You have no way of knowing this. It’s entirely possible they were sent music directly from the labels, artists and representatives. That’s for the courts to decide. Issuing the equivalent of the death sentence before you’ve even been given the opportunity to defend yourself is wrong on every level.

“6 – If young emerging artists are unable to get funding for their releases because the records labels don’t have as much money to invest, then yes, their careers can be hurt.”
Stop It. These labels don’t give out budgets like that, they expect you to get hot yourself then they jump on board. Young new artists rely on these type of blogs to get enough of a buzz for the majors to actually work their project and invest in it.

“7 – considering that the music industry is down 58% in sales of recorded music since the dawn of Napster, the argument is pretty easy to support.”

The music industry is up on every level. The independent music market has risen over 40%. It’s down in numbers since they had to stop their illegal pricing practices. All you are doing is spreading unsupported propaganda, and when people don’t buy into it you stomp your feet like a 2 year old.

So you don’t hold with due process but Mike’s the psychopath? Right. Thanks for clearing that up.

Um, no. Of course they get due process. The assumption–which hasn’t been proved, but has only be assumed (and assumed without having much if any facts, no less), is that their due process rights were violated. You, nor Mike, can show that they were.

My point is that Mike will OBSESS about a hypothetical rights violation when it comes to his pirate friends, but he couldn’t give a rat’s ass about the actual rights violations that pirates do with alarming regularity.

My conclusion is that Mike is a worthless, pirate-loving sack of shit. YMMV.

F*cking Internets, how do they work?

“So the rights to imaginary items trumps the rights of children?”

Record executive: “Children don’t pay for my Bugatti Veyron.”

Your missing some of the point. At the end of the day if someone has been accused of something it is alleged. Thats how the law works in the UK.

If they commit the crime then you can have your argument as to whether things were stolen or not…until a court has said its so anything you say is alleged or suspected. That is why people are upset with the word stolen in this case.

UK readers should really consider emailing or writing to their MP to ask some of the necessary questions here.

Such as why SOCA appears to be making false claims of fact,
seem to be misunderstanding the basics of copyright as the law applies to individual downloaders as opposed to those who distribute infringing files.

And why they are making unsupported, unproven, hyperbolic claims about the effects of infringement on the industry quite gratuitously.

If enough MPs realise that this is an issue, they may actually start demanding some answers.

As an addendum why are SOCA directing people to pro-music

You are either with us or against us right?

If you don’t know their details.

Check here.

http://www.writetothem.com/

I actually had to look up their agency to see whether they were real, after I saw the ‘serious’ there.

For some reason I can’t get the image out of my head of Snape punishing students for having their magic potion explode after singing an unlicensed tune to it.

Just for a giggle, I went to McAf**’s Sit*Advisor* and entered the domain name. They say “We tested this site and didn’t find any significant problems.” They also say regarding the sire’s popularity: Lots of Users and they themselves, got “1 green download”, kleur.zip.

So I was curious if they will get in trouble with the law for an illegal download.

Such silliness.

“Why should they continue to allow an illegal site to continue its illegal activities? They will eventually go to court and if they are found not-guilty they will get the site back.”

Good boy, you’ve been told its illegal, they’ve given you a *non biased explanation of why THEY think, this should be illegal, and corruption is perfectly acceptable in our governcorps……be proud, you’re government loves you, contend providers love you, they want to butt fuck you up the ass, congratulations, for sticking up for those in power, enjoy the butt sex

Oh, I see. Freedom of Speach, unless someone says something you don’t like. “I may disagree with what you say but I will defend to the death your right to say it.”

I hope that you get to learn what censorship is first hand, so you can then learn to tell the difference.

No, I know and I didn’t mean to imply they weren’t.
I was just dealing with the is it genuine question as it was the same reaction I had.

Business model proposal

A domain provider provides domains for internet users.

Have a special type of domain, essentially a certified domain that specifically allows you to share copyrighted material, and the domain is pre configured to easilly allow ads or gives very easy specific intructions to special ads

Now these ads are a special type of ads, where depending on what you claim to be sharing i.e. music, movies etc etc …. a percentage of the revenue goes specifically to said media companies representative………..i.e. 50% to ad company, 30% to media company, 20% to internet user

Now revenue wise, imagine hundreds of people legally starting Media certified sites

Politcians can have their cake with those who dont use certified domains to share copyrighted material, those who are looking to pocket all profit, although anyone who shares for no profit should be exempt, as you should be able to get the same content from certified sites, and im sure users will go to certified sites purely to support the free business model, as long as the corps dont hinder inovation in web designs or efficiency, or try to apply extreme amounts of control, let the internet do what it does

Free stuff, the possibility is there, not necesary the one i mentioned above, but its there, both parties can have their cake, corps, and gov’s by proxy, should embrace

No worries, it’s a bunch of bullshit either way. I’m also at a CDN uni visiting the page multiple times (with multiple user-agents), not for the same purpose as you, for amusement.

Your MP

Try accessing Facebook through a Chinese proxy, see what happens.

it at least deserves its day in court before its censored, don’t you think?

No, of course not. If he was capable of thinking, he wouldn’t have made the comment.

They don’t post active links because there are bots that scan for links.

They missed the major independent sites – bandcamp, cd baby, artist direct, etc. and off course all the net labels.

“Any working musician, manager, producer, etc. will tell you that the music business is making less money all the way around.”

Bullshit. Several have gone on the record about it stating just the opposite. The artists are fine. It’s the gatekeepers losing control that’s the issue.

“Any working musician, manager, producer, etc. will tell you that the music business is making less money all the way around.”

Then how come I keep hearing about artists who are saying that they’re doing better and better year after year?

Oh right, they’re reporting about concert sales, which keep getting sold out around the country and around the world, and people buying records from them directly.

“I’m a complete and utter moron.”

Wow, how truthful of you.

Big Brother is watching YOU…

Although it comes second to you not understanding the meaning of censorship.

>You pirate types are utter morons. I hope you all get sued or end up in jail.

Go back to TorrentFreak, Anon.

“I went and looked.”

Who gives a shit what YOU looked at, boy.

publiccomplaints@soca.x.gsi.gov.uk

“Are you suggesting that law enforcement should NOT go after a pirate site in the same manner that it would go after a pirate selling product on the street or at a flea market, example?”

Dear Apologist Fool: If a stall is seized at the flea market it is not replaced with riot squad van full of policemen writing down the names and addresses of anybody who looks their way, is it?

I think Gillette is coming out with one to take care of that.

Is this a fucking joke ?

The point is that by taking down the site prior to any hearing, they are assumed to be guilty. They are being punished /right now/, regardless of guilt or innocence. I find it disgusting that you actually approve of this. You say the artist suffers if the site stays up, but what if the site truly is innocent? Then the artist hasn’t suffered in the least. And if it isn’t, then the artist recoups via damages, anyways. Leave the site up!

Wow, what a logical jump. That people mark it as insightful only goes to show how easily they are mislead.

If they were licensed, there wouldn’t be legal action, because there would not be a complaint.

That is clear.

“Clearly, if someone is innocent, they wouldn’t be the subject of legal action.”

See, here is how you get it wrong. Clearly, if there is nothing questionable going on, someone might not be subject to a criminal investigation. They might not be brought before a grand jury. The grand jury might not find there is cause for legal action. The legal action may find them… innocent. Are you saying the legal system is defective because not everyone investigated or charged is found guilty?

dajaz1? A decision not to prosecute doesn’t mean there wasn’t bad things going on, only no simple legal way to link the bad activities to the site owners specifically.

The rest of your “clearly” items is an attempt to warp the term. Nice try, tard.

“Then how come I keep hearing about artists who are saying that they’re doing better and better year after year?”

[citation needed].

There is no way to explain how fewer and fewer people attending concerts, venues closing down, and recorded music sales collapsing is making it better overall.

There will always be exceptional cases. But if the music industry was doing as well as Mike Masnick claims, the US wouldn’t be enjoying the 3rd or 4th year of a major recession.

Something just doesn’t add up. Oh, look, it’s Mike’s numbers. They just don’t match up with reality.

Blatant lies, Shame on you shame your country!

Not making any statement about whether or not the site was legal

Because you’re a willfully blind douchebag that is too much of a little man to admit he supports piracy.

“SOCA is basically lying.”
Isn’t this what government does best?

Britain, ground zero of global financial fraud, hasn’t thrown a single banker in jail or even investigated any of the trillions of dollars in fraud from RBS to MF Global… let alone “track” them and threaten them with “unlimited fines” and 10 year prison sentences.

Yet it has resources to pull off stunts like this.

No wonder the whole place is in economic and social free-fall.

I am looking for artists to perform my tracks have a listen and leave feedback. I hope we can work together. http://soundcloud.com/smoothloops