

“Anonymous” File-Sharing Darknet Ruled Illegal - Sami_Lehtinen
https://torrentfreak.com/anonymous-file-sharing-ruled-illegal-by-german-court-121123/

======
Sami_Lehtinen
I have to say, it's interesting to see where this is going to lead to. I
thought this wouldn't be possible in Europe, but tide seems to be turning here
too.

They could have mentioned it's not just "darknet" it's F2F - Friend 2 Friend
network. So there aren't public exit nodes as there is with Tor network. There
are only relays, between network nodes.

I just wonder when Freenet, GNUnet ja Tor will be banned on same basis? As
well as other tools like it.

Based on this policy any "cyber locker" could be taken down. It doesn't matter
if they knew what the file content was or if they didn't. Maybe this comment
has something illegal embedded using stEganogRaphy? Maybe Hacker News will be
taken down too, due spreading illegal content?

anVzdCBzb21lIHJhbmRvbSBzdHVmZg==

This is how Facebook should work: <http://secushare.org/>

~~~
mtgx
Germany is pretty weird about IP laws. They always seem to apply them in the
strictest sense, without any consideration for common sense. I think this
would be pretty easily appealed and overturned.

~~~
jsilence
The Hamburg court is notorious for applying the law in the strictest sense,
other courts in germany are not. But since for any internet related issue the
plaintiff (aka copyright industry) usually use the Hamburg court for their
cases.

 _sigh_. this sucks. and hard.

------
DanBC
>Update: Contrary to the U.S. and elsewhere, a previous ruling in Germany
already makes wireless network operators liable for copyright infringements of
others.

Germany has an interesting history of computer misuse. I'm surprised that CCC
hasn't hacked wifi of German politicians (at their homes and offices) and
transferred a variety of files.

------
aneth4
More accurately:

Users of “Anonymous” File-Sharing Darknet Ruled Liable

The software has not been ruled illegal, but users were held liable for files
passing through their computer - even if they are not involved in the transfer
or aware of the contents.

~~~
mtgx
Which in a way makes it illegal to use the software - if you happen to be in a
F2F network where someone shares some copyrighted material.

~~~
aneth4
Yes, just like it's illegal to walk out of a store (with stolen merchandise.)

~~~
tjoff
I doubt it is illegal to walk out of a store with stolen merchandise that
someone else put in your pocket (without your knowledge).

Of course it might be hard to prove that that was what happened in the store
case.

------
polarcuke
I still don't understand how cases like this are brought up. It seems to me
like random people are targeted at random times. I see stories like this every
day, not about Darknet specifically but about rulings against file sharers and
pirates. Could anyone shed light on how a select few people are singled out of
the masses of people who fileshare.

~~~
fraserharris
In this case, the defendant added the anti-piracy monitoring company as a
friend.

~~~
thefreeman
I don't understand how these company's are legal. It just seems to me that in
order to get a list of illegal sharers they "must" at least attempt to
download or share the copyrighted material. So why aren't they are just as
guilty as they people they report?

~~~
njharman
In most cases they are authorized (and paid by) the legal copyright holders to
find violators. At least in US most cases are brought by industry
organizations.

I heard (and believe it's true) that in Germany, lawyers are given the right
to bring cases against law breakers (maybe only civil) with no client, without
support or even knowledge of the "victim". Paid on a bounty system. Idea being
all these lawyers are incentivized to go out and deter crime.

------
yason
The whole point of Retroshare is that you only connect to your trusted friends
and route your teh warez requestz to other nodes through them. Retroshare is
friend-to-friend, or F2F. It's not a closed darknet but it's a darknet. You
need to have a friend (or preferably friends) through which to connect.

The guy in question had the local equivalent of MAFIAA as a trusted F2F
friend. That's a completely wrong position to begin with. This doesn't make
Retroshare or darknets or F2F networks illegal.

With friends, you can do whatever you want so as long as nobody gets hurt or
the MAFIAA won't know about it.

------
ommunist
Does the ruling technically means that anyone who processes the copyrighted
song on his wetware, for example Jingle Bells (copyrighted by Disney), and
then shares the file by means of acoustic murmuring in a public toilet in
Hamburg with trusted friends, one of which is an anti-piracy maniac, will be
sentenced for 6 months?

------
sbierwagen
... "In Germany", where they don't have safe harbor laws, so it has no effect
on the United States.

~~~
morsch
IANAL. Germany does have a common carrier status for ISPs just like the US. It
doesn't extend to private citizens.

The liability in cases like this is not really settled, though it's not
looking very promising. It's already very difficult to find open Wifi, which
is at least partly due to concerns about liability and their widespread
discussion in the media. OTOH I think there've been Tor exit nodes in Germany
for a long time, though not without subjecting their operators to some legal
harassment (and bills).

------
nnq
> users exchange data through encrypted transfers and the network setup
> ensures that the true sender of the file is always obfuscated

If this were really true in practice, the authorities shouldn't be able to see
whether copyrighted content is transferred through your computer in theory
(except by breaking the law themselves by putting surveillance software on
your computer)... or am I missing something? (or do they have a "weaker"
meaning for the term 'obsfucated'?)

~~~
IsTom
> In this case, the defendant added the anti-piracy monitoring company as a
> friend, which allowed him to be “caught.”

~~~
woofnbark
What's the company called? I don't want to friend them by accident.

------
_quasimodo
> In this case, the defendant added the anti-piracy monitoring company as a
> friend, which allowed him to be “caught.”

This is equivalent to asking a friend for his wifi key, downloading a song and
then have him sued for copyright infringement. Obviously he is the bad guy!

------
gcr
In the US, aren't those who run tor exit nodes already liable for the activity
of those they host? I don't see how this is much different -- different
network in a different country, maybe, but conceptually similar/identical.

~~~
andrewpi
I believe Tor exit nodes are considered internet service providers and thus
are granted safe harbor under the DMCA and CDA Section 230.

~~~
gcr
Interesting. Does that provision also cover those operating unsecured wireless
networks?

