Report: Operating Systems Should Actively Block Pirated Downloads

https://torrentfreak.com/rightsholde...indows-160803/

“The producers of operating systems should be encouraged, or regulated,
for example, to block downloads of copyright infringing material,�

This never could happen with an 'open source' type operating system,
could it not?

In message , /less
writes:
https://torrentfreak.com/rightsholde...pirated-softwa
re-windows-160803/

“The producers of operating systems should be encouraged, or
regulated, for example, to block downloads of copyright infringing
material,�

This never could happen with an 'open source' type operating system,
could it not?

How would _any_ OS "know"
(a) when you're downloading _anything_
(b) that what you're downloading is copryright-infringing?
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

"If you have ten thousand regulations you destroy all respect for the
law." - Winston Churchill.

On 08/04/2016 12:59 AM, /less wrote:
https://torrentfreak.com/rightsholde...indows-160803/

“The producers of operating systems should be encouraged, or regulated,
for example, to block downloads of copyright infringing material,�

How does the OS knew what is Copyrighted material?
Some status Flag in document?
Well, it will be a new challenge to hackers!? :-) :-)

"When Windows 10 was launched last year, rumors spread that the
operating system was equipped with a built-in piracy kill switch"

Hmm.. It seems that it's already working on Windows products!?
My friend tried to Upgrade Win7 to Win10. Win7 was 'illegal' copy, but
in some way was 'legalized'.

After few minutes he got the 'not genuine' message, and the system was
reverted to Win7 ( now with this 'not genuine' notice)! :-) :-)


This never could happen with an 'open source' type operating system,
could it not?

It maybe depends of few factors: Who decides what will be included in
any new product? How deeply will check what's included?

On 08/04/2016 01:27 AM, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
In message , /less writes:
https://torrentfreak.com/rightsholde...pirated-softwa
re-windows-160803/

“The producers of operating systems should be encouraged, or
regulated, for example, to block downloads of copyright infringing
material,�

This never could happen with an 'open source' type operating system,
could it not?

How would _any_ OS "know"
(a) when you're downloading _anything_

?? OS it know! If You are saving something to disk, the origin is known:
another file ( Copy/Move), from external disk, optical media, internet etc..



(b) that what you're downloading is copryright-infringing?

That's the right question!

On Thu, 4 Aug 2016 05:59:26 +0700
/less wrote:

https://torrentfreak.com/rightsholde...indows-160803/

“The producers of operating systems should be encouraged, or
regulated, for example, to block downloads of copyright infringing
material,�

This never could happen with an 'open source' type operating system,
could it not?

Nature of open source is such that DRM can always be eliminated...

On 08/04/2016 01:58 AM, Melzzzzz wrote:
On Thu, 4 Aug 2016 05:59:26 +0700
/less wrote:

https://torrentfreak.com/rightsholde...indows-160803/

“The producers of operating systems should be encouraged, or
regulated, for example, to block downloads of copyright infringing
material,�

This never could happen with an 'open source' type operating system,
could it not?

Nature of open source is such that DRM can always be eliminated...


Sorry, DRM?

This never could happen with an 'open source' type operating system,
could it not?

| Nature of open source is such that DRM can always be eliminated...

One of the companies mentioned was
Google. Android is based on Linux. Chrome
is also based on OSS. In both cases the
result is spyware and lack of control. Being
OS made no difference.

Maybe one could get a Linux phone, but
then there would be no apps. The whole
idea of blocking media theft assumes devices
that people have little control over. That's
already happening, with cellphones, Macs,
Windows 10 and tablets. It might be harder
to restrict a Linux computer, but that's not
what most people now want and use.

| Sorry, DRM?

Digital restriction management. Also known,
in a more Orwellian version, as digital rights
management. (Just as Windows and Linux
file restrictions are referred to with the
euphemism "permissions".) DRM refers to any
system to restrict access and usage of digital
media.

On 2016-08-04 01:27, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
In message , /less writes:
https://torrentfreak.com/rightsholde...pirated-softwa
re-windows-160803/

“The producers of operating systems should be encouraged, or
regulated, for example, to block downloads of copyright infringing
material,�

This never could happen with an 'open source' type operating system,
could it not?

How would _any_ OS "know"
(a) when you're downloading _anything_
(b) that what you're downloading is copryright-infringing?

Windows *might* be able to impede the installation of non approved
software. "Might" as in conspiration theory. I don't see it likely.

In Linux, even less.


Yes, the operating system can analyze the traffic patterns of
applications using the network. And could block it, in the style of a
firewall. It could detect p2p traffic, for instance. But this would slow
the system, and of course, be very intrusive and error prone.

--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.

On 8/3/2016 4:27 PM, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
In message , /less writes:
https://torrentfreak.com/rightsholde...pirated-softwa
re-windows-160803/

“The producers of operating systems should be encouraged, or
regulated, for example, to block downloads of copyright infringing
material,�

This never could happen with an 'open source' type operating system,
could it not?

How would _any_ OS "know"
(a) when you're downloading _anything_
(b) that what you're downloading is copryright-infringing?
There's an app whereby you expose it to a few seconds of music and it will
link you to info about that music and let you download it,
for a fee.
If they can do that, I expect they'd be able to search popular
illegal downloads for a signature.

On 4/08/2016 9:44 AM, Vaso wrote:

Snip
After few minutes he got the 'not genuine' message, and the system was
reverted to Win7 ( now with this 'not genuine' notice)! :-) :-)

One wonders, if MicroSoft were able to determine it was a 'not genuine'
Win7, why did they re-enable it?? Why didn't they show their confidence
in it being 'not genuine', and just wipe the OS??

Daniel

On 08/04/16 00:59, /less wrote:
https://torrentfreak.com/rightsholde...indows-160803/


“The producers of operating systems should be encouraged, or regulated,
for example, to block downloads of copyright infringing material,�

This never could happen with an 'open source' type operating system,
could it not?

Sure it could, if all the developers would agree on doing so, but you
could always be able to work around and recompile the part of the
desktop environment/application which would block your access to a site.

The usefulness of a such block is quite small, as you either block a
domain name or ip and a pirate site could change that quite easily.
Sure you could block a type of traffic, but works only till they change
to another protocol.
Sure you could sign all applications and data and then allow only those
with a valid signature to be used, but that would not work well as you
really need to get all onboard on it, not just Linus.


The likelihood that it would have is 0.

--

//Aho

On Thu, 04 Aug 2016 01:42:15 -0700, mike wrote:

There's an app whereby you expose it to a few seconds of music and it will
link you to info about that music and let you download it,
for a fee.

Shazam and AFAIK no fee is necessary.

https://www.shazam.com/en/apps

My Nexus 5X has a built-in function for this, so no (extra) app is
needed.

If they can do that, I expect they'd be able to search popular

Even if it were possible, it would be easy to avoid. I'm thinking
password protected encryption that changes with each download?

--
s|b

On Thu, 4 Aug 2016 01:50:31 +0200, Vaso wrote:

On 08/04/2016 01:27 AM, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:

(b) that what you're downloading is copryright-infringing?

That's the right question!

I think it's possible by making DRM mandatory for every copyrighted files
(including executables), since DRM requires a "license" (a decoding key) and
phoning-home is required to get the key.

In message , JJ
writes:
On Thu, 4 Aug 2016 01:50:31 +0200, Vaso wrote:

On 08/04/2016 01:27 AM, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:

(b) that what you're downloading is copryright-infringing?

That's the right question!

I think it's possible by making DRM mandatory for every copyrighted files
(including executables), since DRM requires a "license" (a decoding key) and
phoning-home is required to get the key.

For audio and video material, at least, it's not going to work; it only
takes one person to just dub it - even an analogue copy, just one time -
and any DRM is shot.
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

"If even one person" arguments allow the perfect to become the enemy of the
good, and thus they tend to cause more harm than good.
- Jimmy Akins quoted by Scott Adams, 2015-5-5