It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

What is CIRFU? You may not want to know.....

page: 4
72
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 25 2012 @ 08:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by Speedtek
Just for fun, and perhaps to be a bit terrified...

Here's a reverse IP lookup of all the domains hosted at that IP.

[url=http://www.yougetsignal.com/tools/web-sites-on-web-server/?remoteAddress=cirfu.net]>>linky




posted on Jan, 25 2012 @ 09:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by MollyStewart
reply to post by Basilisk
 


Copyright infringement is in place to stop other people reproducing your work for monetary gain or without the creator's approval, be it music, songs or the written word.

Copyright infringement is a crime but file sharing is NOT. If I share files on my pc with others how is that copyright infringement? I can lend a cd I own to someone else so if I rip that to my hard drive and share it with someone else for their personal use, it is hardly theft since I purchased the cd.

I am also free to lend my own books to people I know without fear of copyright infringement.
I think this new bill has little to do with cyber infringement and crime and everything to do with control.


I am still going through today's responses, but I just wanted to say that your post nailed the copyright infringement aspect.

I own a book I bought. I lend it to another person, who reads it. He returns /the physical aspect/ to me. We discuss what the book was about, say it was a good read, and move on. WE nowhere have said that the book was our OWN work, that we should republish it under our own names. We read the story. IT was a book.

Let me further complicate matters with a real life story. A buddy of mine got a new book off the local library's new release shelf, checked it out, and read it. He then gave it to me, and he renewed the subscription, and I finished it, gave it back to him, and he returned it to the local library. That particular book was Richard Dawkins, "A Brief History Through Time".

I never quoted anything from that book online, but I fused alot of that book into what I believe. The ideas Richard Dawkins presented were sound, so the ideas he presented I also espouse. I am not stealing, nor copyright infringing his works, but carrying on his ideas.

I wrote all my thoughts down, and uploaded them to megaupload.com as a text file (fictional), hoping that they'd be stored there. They are lost now, and I can't access my account anymore.

They are punishing the minimum for maximum results. You can't punish the many for a few bad folks, but that is the way it is. So it appears.



posted on Jan, 25 2012 @ 09:39 PM
link   
This is only the beggining. Too bad the sheople are sleeping as usual as the masters of puppets orchestrate and set up even more manipulative programs and red tape for all the yes man / Women robot slaves to gulp down every day just like their venti Latte at Starbucks. ~SheopleNation



posted on Jan, 25 2012 @ 09:39 PM
link   
reply to post by DAVID64
 


Knowledge makes the people informed. TPTB don't want that.

ATS helps people to become informed.

Create the next sentence.



posted on Jan, 25 2012 @ 09:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by KonquestAbySS
reply to post by juveous
 


Seriously these cats think they are going to police file sharing...ROFL...It is nearly impossible especially if you do infrared transfers via P2P..The only way you can do that is if you ban home computers, and be forced to use the internet in a supervised LAN cafe...If that ever happens mass riots...


I so agree.

The backlash of current activities /will/can/perhaps may/ be dealt with.

3rd.



posted on Jan, 25 2012 @ 10:22 PM
link   
Wasn't it established before last time someone did a Whois search for a site last summer that the offices for the Whois search are near the FBI/CIA HQ but have nothing to do with those groups or was being pinged there by the real offices?

If so then nothing to worry about.



posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 01:35 AM
link   
I just need to point out something here about your whois query.

If you notice, all they changed is they took OVER the domain name and effectively did what is known as DNS poisoning.

They didnt actually take the site down or take it over, just its public DNS records, which is what humans use to browse to websites instead of IP addresses. a DNS server is just a repository of what domain name resolves to where.this means that even if a site is only taken down through DNS poisoning, if you know the IP Address of the website, you can still get to it.

For example, www.abovetopsecret.com... resolves to 67.228.0.162...

copy and paste that into your browser instead, and you can see what im talking about.



People are talking about this whole thing like agents kicked down the door and stole the guy and his website away. what would have really happened is he would have been served a letter stating what was about to happen regarding his domain, the breach and crime commited etc.then, the dns posioning would have happened. its no different to a repo man putting locks on your wheels and towing your car away.

Ultimately, this whole situation smells. its like saying we should arrest the ceo of companies that make hard drives because they end up containing child porn or illegal mp3 downloads.

The real reason there was a push to arrest this guy is because he was about to release a online goods store for musicians to be able to sell their music ala itunes, called megabox. the difference is that instead of the labels getting 90% of the profits, that 90% would goto the artist. since there was 40 million or so subscribers to megauploads, that would have been a huge customer base to start with. So, universal music and co pushed for the arrest of this guy so the site couldnt launch, and they could continue making money from musicians...


edit on 26-1-2012 by faaip because: (no reason given)

edit on 26-1-2012 by faaip because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 01:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by aLLeKs

Originally posted by Speedtek
Just for fun, and perhaps to be a bit terrified...

Here's a reverse IP lookup of all the domains hosted at that IP.

[url=http://www.yougetsignal.com/tools/web-sites-on-web-server/?remoteAddress=cirfu.net]>>linky



posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 03:22 AM
link   
reply to post by Druid42
 


Without sounding ignorant, this is making the Deep Web look better and better. Maybe ATS should consider going ,onion? Granted, TPTB could still have a go at them, but it would be a tad harder.

For the information to be a information superhighway, I am in deep shock and sympathy that its common users are not more keenly aware that the freedom of the internet is being chiseled into a tiered cable like internet. I love ATS, read it everyday, learned a lot of great stuff that lead me to outside research I wouldn't have been hipped to anywhere else. Eventually sites like this are going to get the same shakedown, whether its because someone supported their commentary with a link that somebody feels is "copyrighted" versus "fair usage" as an excuse to shut the place down is inevitable. What I forsee is that this is a blatant attempt to start censoring from the bottom up, and then usher in that damn ICE logo so when sites do come back, in order for users to have access to them, they have to be on a internet provider's cloud server system for web hosting, instead of having the freedom to pick and choose their client and hosting service from wherever in the world.

Hope somebody got a internet 2.0 in the making.



posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 05:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by Basilisk
The last article doesn't mention identity theft... it says " They identify cybercrime trends and technologies". Also... Copyright infringement is a crime, If committed online i would think it would be classified as a cyber crime.


Without the judicial branch of government clearly defining what a specific crime is to the public, then it is an infringement on the fundamental rights of people. People have the right to plead ignorance to the law if they don't even know what the law is anymore.

The only cybercrime that I know of is distribution of child pornography. So far, I'm not sure about any other "cybercrime", especially digital piracy. Without the acts turning into laws, then how is the government still allowed to crack down on sites that they claim are illegal?

This whole CIRFU thing is pretty scary. Like it shows in the opening post, CIRFU is used to "refine" a case against someone before they even know they are going to be charged.



posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 07:16 AM
link   
reply to post by Dimitri Dzengalshlevi
 


Cybercrimes:

Child porn distribution.
Identity Theft.
Copyrighted material distribution.

I'll agree, cirfu is pretty scary. They have the authority, and say, geez, how can we use it. There are not many precedents to go by, and IMO they are starting to go about it the wrong way.

Analogy: They are sticking a stick into the hornet's nest. The question is, will they get stung? And if they do, won't they just want to burn the whole hornet's nest away? How far does it need to go?



posted on Jan, 27 2012 @ 12:21 AM
link   
reply to post by Druid42
 


The end game is scarier, IMHO. Force the intellects off the internet, stop innovation, and then use it as a precursor to train the sheeple into becoming that civilian snitch police Obama wants to implement.

How easy will it be to "plant" copyrighted material once they force the cloud on the masses? With TPTB having the access to "check", people will be snitching to the secret police in no time to avoid going to jail for nothing.



posted on Jan, 27 2012 @ 01:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by Druid42
reply to post by Dimitri Dzengalshlevi
 


Cybercrimes:

Child porn distribution.
Identity Theft.
Copyrighted material distribution.

I'll agree, cirfu is pretty scary. They have the authority, and say, geez, how can we use it. There are not many precedents to go by, and IMO they are starting to go about it the wrong way.

Analogy: They are sticking a stick into the hornet's nest. The question is, will they get stung? And if they do, won't they just want to burn the whole hornet's nest away? How far does it need to go?


This somewhat parallels my belief in what's going on. That is, now that this organization (CIRFU) has been constituted and funded, they now have to justify their existence. And they have to do it continuously, from now on. It's not as if they're going to come to the end of a long list of suspect sites, and say, "OK. That's the last one. Let's all go home." No. They will have to keep it up forever and evermore. There can be no end of the list until, so to say, "the end of hostilities." And, like the War on "Terror"--heh... yeah. Wake me up when THAT one's over....

ETA: And I say again: "Someone" or "someones" with a decidedly corporate agenda is going to be picking and choosing targets. We'll know them by their financial stake in the takedown....
edit on 1/27/2012 by Ex_CT2 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 27 2012 @ 01:34 AM
link   
reply to post by Ex_CT2
 


The wars in the U.S. From 1776 to now.

War on Britain
War on France
War on Slavery
War on Abolitionists
War on Suffragists
War on Communists
War on Vietnam
War on Drugs
War on Gangs
War on Terrorism
War on Internet.


Guess they have to keep building that war economy, huh.



new topics

top topics



 
72
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join