Relevant? "Often referred to as copyright trolling, speculative invoicing involves sending hundreds or thousands of demand letters alleging copyright infringement and seeking thousands of dollars in compensation. Those cases rarely — if ever — go to court as the intent is simply to scare enough people into settling in order to generate a profit."
http://yro.slashdot.org/story/13/03/12/1449244/canadian-file-sharing-plaintiff-admits-to-copyright-trolling On Tuesday, March 12, 2013 9:31am, "Matt Joyce" <torad...@mttjocy.co.uk> said: > _______________________________________________ > tor-relays mailing list > tor-relays@lists.torproject.org > https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays > I think you have probably gotten unlucky here in all honesty given the > traffic you are pushing over there and having an issue so early on don't > take it as an indication of expected rates either, I use the recommended > reduced exit policy on both of my relays on is 20Mbit capacity and has > been running about 6 months, I've yet to receive anything in the way of > DMCA or abuse complaints about that one as yet, the newest one is a > large relay which has actually been running just one day less than your > one over there, however it's sitting on a 1Gbps connection and as of > today averaging on the order of around 219.40 Mbit/s (110Mbit each > direction) having transferred 16.45TiB, in the two weeks since it was > first activated, the rate has been rising most of that time such that > 1.87TiB of that transfer was yesturday, 2.21TiB is the estimate for > today. I'm so glad it's unmetered xD. > > You can see the traffic stats for it on the relay info page at > http://torexit2.mttjocy.co.uk/ I hope that helps at least to settle some > of your concerns that it might scale linearly, were it to do so then > this bandwidth would be producing them at rate approximately 20 times > more frequently or around 40 per 16 days ~2.5 letters a day which is > significantly higher than the 0 actually received. > > So it's either unfortunate luck on your part of they are doing a lot > more careful checking before sending their random notes out than they > appear to be and figured out that I'm not the type to scare easy if they > even had a case let alone when they are blowing smoke. But I would > highly doubt that unless they are burning a few hundred doing a detailed > background check that would actually pick up something like minor civil > settlements before sending any notices it's not something you would find > on a casual google, and if they *were* doing that yet apparently still > not coming up with the simple idea of err type the IP address into > google and don't waste your time and money when it comes back saying > it's a tor exit node well that would be going beyond stupid to be fair. > > On 12/03/13 07:41, jv...@altsci.com wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> I've been running a Tor exit node on my new server for 16 days. Today I >> received >> my second automated DMCA infringement notice from HBO. I sent them the >> boilerplate you see at the bottom of the message both times. My colo provider >> Hurricane Electric understands Tor, which is awesome. I don't think it'll be >> an >> issue, so I'm happy with this. I'm wondering if anyone receives a large >> number of >> DMCA infringement notices and whether there was a resolution. It would >> certainly >> make my life a little bit more difficult to send more than one of these per >> week. >> When I got my first letter I was pushing 5 Mbps (megabits) and now I'm >> pushing 9 >> Mbps. I've set the RelayBandwidthRate to 5120 KB which should give a max >> rate of >> 41 Mbps. If infringement notices increases linearly with traffic, this could >> become an issue. >> >> I'm happy to share the infringement notices if anyone is interested. >> >> I followed a few of the tips from >> https://blog.torproject.org/running-exit-node , >> I got a separate IP address and I reduced the exit policy. I plan to update >> the >> reverse dns. I don't feel like reducing the exit policy does anything because >> BitTorrent was designed to run on any high port. Also, reducing the exit >> policy >> blocks researchers who are doing port scans and header grabbing over Tor. >> That's >> a point of contention for me because I know legitimate researchers use Tor >> for >> that purpose. Does anyone have any data or anecdotes on how exit policy >> affects >> malicious use of Tor vs legitimate use of Tor? >> >> Btw, my server is 216.218.134.12. I'm running a patched version of tor >> 0.2.3.25 >> which fixes a few bugs I found in buffer events. See >> https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/7788 for more info. Uptime >> is now >> 6 days, 13 days without a crash. >> >> Thanks, >> Javantea >> >> ------------------- >> >> Dear Andrew Martin: >> >> The IP address in question is a Tor exit node. >> https://www.torproject.org/overview.html >> >> There is little we can do to trace this matter further. As can be seen >> from the overview page, the Tor network is designed to make tracing of >> users impossible. The Tor network is run by some 2500 volunteers who >> use the free software provided by the Tor Project to run Tor routers. >> Client connections are routed through multiple relays, and are >> multiplexed together on the connections between relays. The system >> does not record logs of client connections or previous hops. >> >> This is because the Tor network is a censorship resistance, privacy, >> and anonymity system used by whistle blowers, journalists, Chinese >> dissidents skirting the Great Firewall, abuse victims, stalker >> targets, the US military, and law enforcement, just to name a few. >> See https://www.torproject.org/about/torusers.html.en for more info. >> >> Unfortunately, some people misuse the network. However, compared to >> the rate of legitimate use (the IP address in question processes >> approximately 11 megabits of traffic per second), abuse complaints are >> rare. >> https://www.torproject.org/docs/faq-abuse.html.en >> >> This is the second e-mail from you that I am replying to. The only >> thing that has changed is that I have increased the bandwidth to 9 >> megabits per second. >> >> If you have further questions, feel free to contact me at >> ------------ >> >> Sincerely, >> ----------- >> _______________________________________________ >> tor-relays mailing list >> tor-relays@lists.torproject.org >> https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays > > > _______________________________________________ tor-relays mailing list tor-relays@lists.torproject.org https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays
