Menu
▾
▴
#1 Core Concept Bug.
open
nobody
None
5
2012-09-20
2006-08-15
Anonymous
No
It seems that this is a "encrypted mapping system" and
copyright can quite easily be applied to the "key" that
is required to assemble multiple blocks to form a
descriptor... Essentially it is a 1,048,576 bit
encoding system with 'encryption'... with 2^1,048,576
possible "charecter" combinations you are officially
the worlds largest "charecter encoding system" but
thats about it..
IMHO All a copyright lawyer would have to do is put a
second year "math" student with a backing of "discrete"
math & pc's to prove this point... Because:
1) encrypting it (even with a one time pad) still makes
it copyright violation.
2) "Either all of these artists have equal claim to the
block for different uses, or no one has a claim to the
block", Thats correct No-one has claim to the 'block'
they have claim to the combination of blocks & the
'key' that is required to "determine" which blocks go
together to form a file.
e.g.
eab335eacab7a76fa3be055c4d87c9f3d3abb77b7c924f225836411a81b00635f51f809f92927e78742e7386754c779fc2c537092c86c56d56328d770c33382ebde85b407fb1e4e51eb09eee67b2333d
is the breech of copyright law right there.
Simplfied Example. Each person in a group of 256 has
3) "In fact, it is highly possible that a given block
will represent BOTH a descriptor block AND another
competing design. " Does not matter AS
4) "There exists sequences of numbers to which two or
more parties may claim copyright
with equal validity for different purposes, therefore
if copyright exists for these
sequences it must be limited only to certain uses of a
given sequence. Furthermore,
possessing one of these sequences does not imply
violation of any particular copyright. "
5) "The fact they
could be displayed is enough to make them appear as
copies" This quote actually proves my point :P
6) "equally distributed probability" Depends on your
psuedo-random algorythm (well there aint such a thing
as a "true" random algorythm for a PC. The best ones
are just based on "chaos" math & using either the
system timer or heat of the cpu as the 'seed')
7) "but it can easily be reconstructed by
using the identifier “B / C” to symbolize XORing blocks
B and C." so by providing blocks B & C you are
providing Block A..
8) "then copyright must be
limited only to certain uses of a given sequences" It
just makes the descriptor (C).
9) "Morgan has ever reproduced Z,
intends to reproduce Z, or knows he can reproduce Z."
but if morgan has 100,000,000 blocks how will he ever
remember which is which. Unless he writes them down
somewhere...
See in your situation it becomes then impossible to
actually transmit Z without knowing that C x D == Z.
and the people that have that information will be the
ones that actually become liable for it.. (as for any
filesharing network you will need to provide some kind
of "search" algorythm for files based on names or
content. That search would most likely return some kind
of ticket (ie C x D) and BANG!!!! the person providing
the ticket is also gonna get sued..
I should point out that I believe in your actual
'cause' (just not your implemenation of it. )
Logged In: NO
(addenum to Point 3) Does not matter AS that "descriptor"
will need some way of being differentiated from any other
block so it can be "remembered" by a person.
(addenum poitnt 4) and copyright infrengement would be
caused by providing "instructions" on how to turn it into 1
persons or another persons (C) material.
Logged In: NO
This implementation will fail because, as the annon above me
pointed out, the key to unlock the files is what then
becomes illegal. Sorry boys, but darknets are still much
"safer."
Logged In: NO
You can't put copyright on a mathematical process, which is
why copyright law is pretty much worthless here.
Logged In: NO
Well how about this...
I have a song... Lets make this real simple... Lets make it
the alphabet song, and lets assume that the lyrics are (C)
to someone... Lets assume for simplicity sake that the
entire ascii table is our collection of blocks..
Everyone is allowed to copy the ascii table freely but the
person who puts onto the web
------ ( simple Equiv. of "descriptor" algorythm ) ------
Alphabet Song
{0 < 27} f(x) = x + 97
------ ( Encoding algorythm ) -------
Alphabet Song
{0 < 27} f(x) = x % g(x)
is gonna get sued because they provided the "key" thats
required to unlock a (C) piece of material.
Oh and P.S. you can 'copyright' a mathamatical process its
called a patent. by doing one of those it stops other people
from copying your math for many years to come (i.e: GIF
encoding)
Logged In: NO
well, I think the concept works for what it's worth. It
protects the uploader and the download against beeing logged
by agents in the network, as nobody knows what anybody are
downloading. I do, haowever, agree that the key is the link
that will be attaced here. As The Pirate Bay are doing in
sweden right now, the right to say "C x A == Z" is a matter
of free speech in an open forum like the internet. It's not
even illegal to say it, it's just that everybody with an IQ
above 40 gets the deal. But TPB means denying someone to say
this is censorship. The trial is on it's way. In any case,
the information about the right blocks will always be
available through some source. There will always be a
country to place the server with this information in. OFF
solves the real problem of todays favourite P2P, BitTorrent,
by making it impossible to tell whos downloading what from
who, witch has been the "scarecrow" for users till now.
Logged In: YES
user_id=136799
Eventual copyright infringements taking place with the
assistance of the OFF network happens locally on your
computer so someone have to check the actual content on your
harddisk to prove anything. Both downloaders and uploaders
are thus protected from agents spying on the network.
The key to commit copyright infringement on a file is its
URL so if a site will index the network and provide URLs to
copyrighted files (without the owners' consent) it is just
as vulnerable to lawyers as The Pirate Bay and other sites
providing torrents are today, the difference is that the
users' (downloaders and uploaders) activities are completly
obfuscated.
Logged In: NO
If I understand this concept correctly, I see no reason why the "key" or "descriptor" file that contains the instructions for reassembling the original file from the random blocks couldn't be stored within the random blocks.
Let me clarify.
You have a big collection of files you downloaded (or the potential for files) within your cache of random blocks. Then you have a "key" file for each file you want to be able to reconstruct. OFF supports directories, so you take all of your "key" files and put them into a directory and dump them into OFF. So now you have 1 "key" file that tells you how to get all of your other "key" files. That 1 "key" file can be stored anywhere, since it's only function is to provide the location of the first block of your "key" files directory. You could put this file on a usb drive, encrypt it with passwords, and possibly (I don't know if this is possible or practical) even store it on paper or in your head.
Let the RIAA search your Hard Drive. Now they can't even find the "key" files, so as far as your hard drive is concerned it is full of random data without even the potential to become useful files.
Since everyone's argument is that the "key" file could be considered the copyrighted information, this seems to be the solution. And legally speaking, since you created the master "key" file, (the one that is encrypted on some usb stick in a safe where they will never find it) out of your own data, it can't be considered copyrighted either.