ArtsAutosBooksBusinessEducationEntertainmentFamilyFashionFoodGamesGenderHealthHolidaysHomeHubPagesPersonal FinancePetsPoliticsReligionSportsTechnologyTravel

Is Demonoid a DOJ trap to catch unsuspecting pirates?

Updated on March 20, 2011

Now that Daniel Dove, the former upload administrator at the United States Department of Justice (DOJ)-squashed BitTorrent tracker and search engine EliteTorrents, has been found guilty of conspiracy and felony copyright infringement and could face up to ten years in prison in the first P2P Criminal Jury Case ever in the United States, the question that has to be asked is: Why are other major P2P sites still alive and kickin'?

The Department of Justice claims that EliteTorrents attracted more than 125,000 members, who downloaded over 700 movies more than a total of 1.1 million times. That is a mere drop in the bucket as compared to some other sites that are not only operating in full violation of every imaginable copyright law on the books, but thriving!

It certainly seems Demonoid may be operated by the U.S. Government!
It certainly seems Demonoid may be operated by the U.S. Government!

The single most suspicious site has to be Demonoid.com, which has long been a prime cornucopia of pirated applications, movies, comic books, and much more. After jumping around a few countries to try to find a safe haven to operate from, the site finally shut down in November of 2007. With a shrug, most of the seeders and leechers marched off to other sites which operate in supposedly torrent-tolerant countries such as Sweden which is the home for the giant Pirate Bay site or Italy where television show supersite EZTV resides. However, it was rather strange that after almost six months to the day of its shutdown, Demonoid came back online, all of its files intact and looking just like it did before. Apparently a new forum administrator had taken over from the legendary Deimos and everything was back to normal in the world of Demonoid. Download away!

Well... not exactly. Although when the site relaunched in April, 2008 there were claims that the new site was hosted in the "anything goes" Ukraine, and that the domain was owned in Brazil, all far from the reach of the United States DOJ, a precursory WHOIS search revealed that Demonoid was now hosted by American server hosting company Softlayer. If it is indeed the case that Demonoid is now apparently being hosted in the United States, that discovery represents an extremely puzzling turn in the Demonoid saga.

The last country you would want to host a pirate site in is the United States and Softlayer seems to be the last host that would take on a DOJ lightning rod like Demonoid. Softlayer claims to have almost 40,000 servers in three state of the art facilities in Washington, DC, Dallas and Seattle and by all accounts they are doing a great deal of business with perfectly legitimate companies. What possible reason would they have to expose themselves to massive legal action brought against them by the United States Government? Especially since Softlayer's CEO, Lance Crosby, is a licensed attorney and a member of the Texas State Bar?

I do not illegally download anything. I don't have Azureus or any similar software on my hard drive. But if I were a leecher or even more critically a seeder, I would give Demonoid an extremely wide berth. It doesn't take a wild-eyed conspiracy theorist to believe that what better place would there be to host one of the world's leading illegal torrent sites than in Washington, DC, right under the noses of the DOJ. If and it's a big if, it was the DOJ who took down Demonoid in the first place and has now resurrected the site as a gigantic trap to track the IP of every seeder and leecher along with their complete activities, then any pirate should use Demonoid at their peril.

There is some confusion about the physical location of the 62.149.24.66 IP Address and I certainly wouldn't put it past the DOJ to have worked out some stealthy redirection strategy. Is Demonoid a honey pot set there by the DOJ to catch thousands of pirates with their hand in it, setting up a massive number of arrests? It sure looks like it.

 

Check out hundreds of Hal's PC Technology articles in these categories:

Comments

Submit a Comment

  • Hal Licino profile image
    Author

    Hal Licino 8 years ago from Toronto

    You are the moron. By your completely erroneous definition, every time any newspaper, magazine, or news broadcast would run a piece on any corporation and show its logo they would have to get written permission. THAT NEVER HAPPENS! You are so dumb that it literallly pains me. Do the world a favor and exile yourself to Stupidity Island. I have better things to do with my time than entertain the terminally idiotic. This conversation is over. Comments are closed. Goodbye, idiot.

  • profile image

    T-nigma 8 years ago

    Well said. It is amazing that you have deleted posts and bashed other poters for using words that you just used yourself. You did not back up any of your claims at all in regards to my previous posts. Aside form all of that, you have no idea about copyright law. So I will post the rules for you from the United States Copyright Offices website regarding the rules and "four-factor balance test" to show you and every other reader your complete incompetence.

    "One of the rights accorded to the owner of copyright is the right to reproduce or to authorize others to reproduce the work in copies or phonorecords. This right is subject to certain limitations found in sections 107 through 118 of the Copyright Act (title 17, U. S. Code). One of the more important limitations is the doctrine of “fair use.” Although fair use was not mentioned in the previous copyright law, the doctrine has developed through a substantial number of court decisions over the years. This doctrine has been codified in section 107 of the copyright law.

    Section 107 contains a list of the various purposes for which the reproduction of a particular work may be considered “fair,” such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Section 107 also sets out four factors to be considered in determining whether or not a particular use is fair:

    the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;

    the nature of the copyrighted work;

    amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and

    the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.

    The distinction between “fair use” and infringement may be unclear and not easily defined. There is no specific number of words, lines, or notes that may safely be taken without permission. Acknowledging the source of the copyrighted material does not substitute for obtaining permission.

    The 1961 Report of the Register of Copyrights on the General Revision of the U.S. Copyright Law cites examples of activities that courts have regarded as fair use: “quotation of excerpts in a review or criticism for purposes of illustration or comment; quotation of short passages in a scholarly or technical work, for illustration or clarification of the author's observations; use in a parody of some of the content of the work parodied; summary of an address or article, with brief quotations, in a news report; reproduction by a library of a portion of a work to replace part of a damaged copy; reproduction by a teacher or student of a small part of a work to illustrate a lesson; reproduction of a work in legislative or judicial proceedings or reports; incidental and fortuitous reproduction, in a newsreel or broadcast, of a work located in the scene of an event being reported.”

    Copyright protects the particular way an author has expressed himself; it does not extend to any ideas, systems, or factual information conveyed in the work.

    The safest course is always to get permission from the copyright owner before using copyrighted material. The Copyright Office cannot give this permission.

    When it is impracticable to obtain permission, use of copyrighted material should be avoided unless the doctrine of “fair use” would clearly apply to the situation. The Copyright Office can neither determine if a certain use may be considered “fair” nor advise on possible copyright violations. If there is any doubt, it is advisable to consult an attorney." http://www.copyright.gov/fls/fl102.html

    Now, your hub does not apply to any of the 4 factors. Also you used the two logos to create your own, which is also a violation of the copyright laws as you did not seek permission.

    So who is the moron here?

  • Hal Licino profile image
    Author

    Hal Licino 8 years ago from Toronto

    You're not a lawyer. You're a moron.

    "Fair use is a doctrine in United States copyright law that allows limited use of copyrighted material without requiring permission from the rights holders, such as use for scholarship or review. It provides for the legal, non-licensed citation or incorporation of copyrighted material in another author's work under a four-factor balancing test."

    All four factors apply to this Hub.

    You're a moron.

    You're a moron.

    Did I mention you're a moron? :)

    Oh and BTW, you're supposedly a lawyer who supposedly is a huge uploader, so the authorities may be interested in your IP:

    74.128.44.141

    Have a nice day. Hopefully behind bars. :)

  • profile image

    T-nigma 8 years ago

    Oh, btw, where did you get the demonoid and DOJ logo, because if you copy and pasted from their respectives sites, and posted them together with photshop, you, by law, just commited copyright infringement. You "stole" those objects from copyrighted sites and upload them to your site. By law, those are copyrighted instruments and you just stole intellectual property. And just so we put the issue to bed, I am sure did not seek the DOJ's nor Demonoids permission to use those objects. Also you do not have a disclaimer on this site crediting the respective companies. So, sir, you are just as "guilty" as ever demonoider on the web, and should be ashamed of yourself.

    I will notify Demonoid of your infringement and have them put you on notice. Unless, of course, you issue a public apology to the Demonoid user base. On second thought, naw, I will notify them. Oh and before you try and justify the facts,

    I will quote...YOU, Hal Licino

    "Stop trying to justify CRIME!"

  • profile image

    T-nigma 8 years ago

    "You not only have demonstrated that you, like most pirates, are a criminal fool by your statement that Microsoft is "one of the biggest pirates", but you have betrayed your fundamental misunderstanding of software development and marketing. Let's take a look at the differences between Photoshop CS3 and CS4. The specifications list includes hundreds of new features, including the ability to utilize the GPU for computing functions! Do you think that some haxor in his bedroom came up with that one night while guzzling Jolt Cola and sold it to Adobe for $20? Adobe spends millions of dollars to continually develop and upgrade their product, and they are entitled to not only make that money back but to obtain a reasonable profit. Therefore IF YOU STEAL PHOTOSHOP YOU ARE A THIEF. Stop trying to justify CRIME!"

    First of Hal, Adobe does not pay millions for software development. Does Chrysler pay millions to build a $30,000.00 car. NO, the initial setup may cost millions, but they are a companythat has been around for a better part of 10 yrs. So now they pay salaries. The last time I checked they only had 8 software developers who strictly work with/on the Photoshop title.

    Secondly, those "idiots", in Sweden, as you call them, are software writers themselves. They operate the PirateBay site which is larger than Demonoid.

    Thirdly, Demonoid is not run by the DOJ, are you serious. Since when has the governement ever run an operation for this long and gotten results. They can even find Usama Bin Laden after 9 years.

    Lastly, I am one of the biggest uploaders on Demonoid. I will never and I will never be "caught". The DOJ are a bunch of degenerate beauracrats that could find a water in a rain storm. Just look at Nancy Pelosi, she said the CIA and the DOJ lied to her, she was lying with that statement, and they can't even prove that.

    In conclusion, you have no idea why Demonoiders do what they do. I have never seen your book on Amazon (I just searched it) and you do not have a valid argument.

    Also, it is the MPAA and the RIAA that finds and sues the people they think are guilty, not the DOJ. The Government have bigger fish to fry. Oh, and from a legal standpoint, (I am a Lawyer, licensed in the State of Indiana), it is not against the law of copyrights to download anything, it is against the law to upload copyrighted material. So as long as it is not any shared folder you can download as much as you want. We as demonoiders only recommend that you upload as much as you download, it is only fair to keep the download going.

  • Hal Licino profile image
    Author

    Hal Licino 8 years ago from Toronto

    Total nonsense. You're trying to call the winner in the middle of the race. Just wait and see when the DOJ hammer comes down, dude. :)

  • profile image

    DTN 8 years ago

    Hal Licino; you have been arguing on this page for almost a year and nothing you have claimed has been proven to this day

    in refernce to your first argument about demonoid being a trap; i hope you realize demonoid is just as safe as the next site and is clearly not a trap as no one has been charged.

    Besides im sure there are bigger uploaders on other sites than demonoid and bigger fish to catch if this was feasable.

  • Hal Licino profile image
    Author

    Hal Licino 8 years ago from Toronto

    "No evidence is needed." Wow. I think that may just win the prize for the single most ignorant statement ever made on HubPages. Congratulations.

    So answer me this, rocket scientist: Why would the DOJ kill the goose that's laying the golden pirate eggs? They're accumulating a database that's truly golden, and gathering enough information to sort out the small time ankle biters from the big uploaders so they can prosecute with airtight certainty of prosecution, not like those bozos in Sweden! :P

  • profile image

    Blah 8 years ago

    No evidence is needed, the thing that proves it isn't true, is your stupidity.

    Seriously if it was true, how come there hasn't been any large amount of cases? You created it like eleven months ago.

    The problem here, is your lack of knowledge of the subject matter in hand, or is that clouded by some hatred.

  • Hal Licino profile image
    Author

    Hal Licino 8 years ago from Toronto

    The only crack is in your skull... and only a moron brother-in-brainlessness like "Demonoid User" would place a comment that does not in any way provide any evidence or even opinion to substantiate your standpoint. Goes to prove that torrent download pirates just could be stupid enough to fall into a Fed trap! :P

  • profile image

    Blah 8 years ago

    Hal Liino,

    Stay off the crack, discuss something you have knowledge of and do something more worthwhile than creating complete BS articles, like the above.

  • Hal Licino profile image
    Author

    Hal Licino 8 years ago from Toronto

    Demonoid User. Grow a brain cell. I'm not publishing comments with expletives. If you have a point to make, do it without scathology!

  • Hal Licino profile image
    Author

    Hal Licino 8 years ago from Toronto

    Keep in mind, earnestshub, that there are countless torrents that are perfectly legal and it was the specific intent of the copyright holder to distribute them freely in that format. The important factor is whether the copyright is being violated or not. If you're downloading a torrent of, say, a documentary which was released in torrent form directly by the filmmaker, that is not only legal, but desireable. If you're downloading a movie that has just premiered at your local cinema for a $14 admission price, then it's clearly illegal.

  • earnestshub profile image

    earnestshub 8 years ago from Melbourne Australia

    This hub was an eye opener for me hal.

    I have torrent I do not even know where I got it or why. I did not know what torrent was for. Now I do I will delete it.I have no desire to steal either.

  • Hal Licino profile image
    Author

    Hal Licino 8 years ago from Toronto

    Complete nonsense. What are you doing with Photoshop? Playing tiddlywinks?Photoshop is a professional image manipulation software intended for people who make their living in the imaging field. You're creating a work, and one that you will likely get paid for. The use of the software is enabling you to perform that work allowing the client to pay you for it, instead of someone else who actually paid for the software legally, depriving them of the income. So not only are you ripping off software you don't have rights to from a company, you are also ripping off money you don't have right to from your law abiding competitor. If you had to actually pay for the software, you would then have to compete, fair and square, with your competition for the work, having to amortize equivalent value for the software you are both using. Therefore your assumption that you would never buy Photoshop even if you had the money is ridiculous. A client comes over to you, waves a few thousand dollar bills under your nose, and you're not going to go and shell out $700 to get the job? That makes you even more of a fool.

    You're a criminal. Live with it.

  • zuk1 profile image

    zuk1 8 years ago

    It's not the same as stealing a car. I would never buy Adobe Photoshop (for example) even if I had the money to buy it, but I'll happily download and use it and it WON'T HAVE HURT THEIR SALES.

    However, a car is a physical object and if I take it I'm taking somebodies personal posession and there is one less car in legit circulation.

  • Hal Licino profile image
    Author

    Hal Licino 8 years ago from Toronto

    Hmm... very interesting... it seems that there are some users out there getting burned!

  • profile image

    randy me 8 years ago

    everything i get busted for by my isp is from demonoid

    and i was thinking this from day one they come back on.

  • Hal Licino profile image
    Author

    Hal Licino 8 years ago from Toronto

    Absolutely spot on. There is no difference between stealing my book or stealing my car. Either way, pirates are depriving me of something I have worked very hard to have and expect that it's their right? I wholeheartedly encourage pirates to come and try to steal my car... I'll be happy to introduce them to my good friends: Smith & Wesson! :)

  • Kika Rose profile image

    Kika Rose 8 years ago from Minnesota

    I don't get it.

    Stealing is stealing.

    You can't go up to the guy at the register saying, "Oh, well, I'm getting this for free, because I don't feel like paying this price for it."

    Just because a person isn't actually in front of you, doesn't make it any better. I repeat, stealing is stealing. There is no other way around it, so why continue to do it? If someone were to go and steal something of mine, be it a shirt I made, a book I bought, or a poem I wrote, I'd be knocking at their door demanding either my crap back, or monetary compensation. ... Well, okay, if they stole one of my books, I wouldn't just be demanding, I'd be beating their face in... MY BOOKS, RAWR! o.o (*cough* Sorry, bibliomania kicking in...)

    How would those of you who are for P2P like it if someone came and took something of yours because they like it and didn't feel like paying for it? It's yours, isn't it? You bought/created it, didn't you? Maybe I should come over to your houses and start taking your CDs, your video game consoles, your cars. And when you come back and say, "Hey, this is mine!" I'll kindly reply, "Well, I wanted it, and I didn't feel like paying for it, so I'm just taking it. You do it with your internet pirating, why can't I do it back to you?"

  • Hal Licino profile image
    Author

    Hal Licino 8 years ago from Toronto

  • profile image

    Sir Patrick 8 years ago

    I've read this page top to bottom and while i understand both arguements, i'm inclined to take the side of the pirates here. What people have to understand is that there is a reason why people infringe copyright agreements. For the most part, these people don't have the despensible income to put to books, music, dvds etc. Their money NEEDS to go on gas, electricity, heat for their homes.

    What you need to understand is that if piracy was not there its likely that while the sale of your book might rise a little, it wont be a large increase as many people still wont be able to afford it.

    Also with regards to software pricing, are you realy that naive that you think corporate giants like microsoft or adobe would slash prices if the pirates suddenly stopped? If they are making sales at that price then they would leave the price as they stand. The high prices of their software push people into copyright infringement. Microsoft and Adobe have to make the first move in order to solve this problem

  • Hal Licino profile image
    Author

    Hal Licino 8 years ago from Toronto

    You not only have demonstrated that you, like most pirates, are a criminal fool by your statement that Microsoft is "one of the biggest pirates", but you have betrayed your fundamental misunderstanding of software development and marketing. Let's take a look at the differences between Photoshop CS3 and CS4. The specifications list includes hundreds of new features, including the ability to utilize the GPU for computing functions! Do you think that some haxor in his bedroom came up with that one night while guzzling Jolt Cola and sold it to Adobe for $20? Adobe spends millions of dollars to continually develop and upgrade their product, and they are entitled to not only make that money back but to obtain a reasonable profit. Therefore IF YOU STEAL PHOTOSHOP YOU ARE A THIEF. Stop trying to justify CRIME!

  • profile image

    Mr nice 8 years ago

    The price never comes down! They may drop it slightly but thats about it. never in your life 75% not even 50.

    Lets say it cost them $XXX to "write" this photoshop. once "written" it cost them very little in up keep. pure profit... They and you are blaming it on piracy but thats just not the case. As someone up the page stated it started in the 80's. Sony jumped on the band wagon and said it had to put the price "through the roof" because thay had to "write" copy protection software. Bullshit. It is a fantastsic reson to put the price right up there.

    Look into the facts please. One of the biggest pirates are Microsoft! Why do you think we have so many virus/trojen/worm attacing this operating system. Thats why I never download anything with an .EXE/.MP3 etc. as they can not be trusted. So I have to choose open sorce software.

    to find a "CLEAN" copy of photoshop can cost you more in te long run.

  • Hal Licino profile image
    Author

    Hal Licino 8 years ago from Toronto

    That is a circuitous argument. If piracy was to be eliminated, the cost of software would diminish (in some cases, such as the most widely pirated programs) as much as 75%! That would help everyone! Take a look at Adobe Photoshop. The latest version costs almost $700. Why? Because Photoshop is likely the most widely pirated software anywhere. Everyone (INCLUDING ME) who pays the money to purchase that software legitimately is subsidizing all the THIEVES to the tune of $500 or more!

  • profile image

    KrisMiss 8 years ago

    If software wasn't so damn expensive, perhaps people wouldn't be so inclined to steal it! And yes, even though I've done it, I still think it's stealing.

  • Hal Licino profile image
    Author

    Hal Licino 8 years ago from Toronto

    zuk1, definitely showing up in the Ukraine now! Very interesting, huh?

    Erick Smart, I agree that going after the little fish is not the way to proceed but at some point, some answer has to be found. You can't jail and fine most of the world's population, but you also can't let intellectual property be freely appropriated with no controls whatsoever. If you remove the impetus for creating works, you run the risk of the works no longer being created, and that would impoverish us all!

  • profile image

    Erick Smart 8 years ago

    I know this is a big problem for everyone from software companies to the music industry since they lose so much money. But going after the little drops in the bucket that have a few downloaded files will not stop the problem.

    I have no idea what the solution is but trying to catch the little fish is just not it.

  • zuk1 profile image

    zuk1 8 years ago

    http://who.is/whois-com/ip-address/demonoid.com/

    Looks like it's hosted in the Ukraine to me...

  • profile image

    One and only 8 years ago

    I'm another on the side of P2P.

    If I turn on the radio, I hear a tune and if I like, I buy it!

    You can not do that with a book, film, etc!

    As you say "testdrive".

    So are your DOE primarily after the downloaders or the UPLOADERS?

    Apparently there are quite a few FOOLS out here.

  • needful things profile image

    needful things 8 years ago from Poland

    Hmmm... what can I say. I love torrents. But I do buy original stuff... testdrive...

  • Hal Licino profile image
    Author

    Hal Licino 8 years ago from Toronto

    I'll have the last words with pleasure.

    Sir, you are a fool.

    Have a nice life. :)

  • profile image

    Phatdriver 8 years ago

    I didn't mean to touch a nerve. All that money you had a divine right to, huh, but torrenting took away your bentley! Thats what your p****d off at! But that's right, take it out on the little people - if that's what you think will help! Same ol same - round and round we go!

    The part ABOUT MY PHILOSOPHY, A RIGHT TO THINGS YOU DONT PAY FOR! Where did you get that from? Seems you only hear what you want. You're a bit egotistical and patronising but of cause you know you're right, don't you... You just can't talk to some people.

    I earn more than enough thanx, I even had the same Herd mentality. In my line of work I see some nasty things done by "nice, respectful" people just for a laugh. Now when I look at this objectivly, I can hardly stomach what I see! Life goes on...

    Are or did Demonoid host your book? That's what this is all about, isn't it?

    You and your bentley.

    You may have the last words, make em good...

  • Hal Licino profile image
    Author

    Hal Licino 8 years ago from Toronto

    You know, the bank down the street has way too much cash. Their safe is stuffed with it. What are they going to do with it all? They're pirates anyway since they charge exorbitant interest rates to people who can't afford it. So tell you what... let's go down there with a balaclava and a gun and relieve them of some of that cash. Then we can stop off at an electronics big box store and use that gun to get some new PS3s, and heck, while we're at it, we can drop in at the Bentley dealership and get that real nice 2009 Bentley Continental GT I've had my eye on. After all, if your philosophy is that you have a divine right to things you don't pay for let's go for it! :P

  • profile image

    Phatdriver 8 years ago

    What is it with you and ganja? Stop that! I take it you don't agree, good boy. Do you eat red meat? Christ! Too much water can be bad for you ya know? Enough of that!P2P has always been here, in one form or another. In the 80's it was floppy disks and Public Domain. Now it's torrent and a dodgy little chinese man trying to sell me a s***e DVD! There's a substantial amount of people who believe things should be non profit! Done because they wanted to do them.Computer games, DVDs etc. in the UK are extortionate. a Play Station 3 cost £350 ($700) and a game can cost up to £50 ($100) or there abouts. How much in less fortunate countries?I didnt want to say this but I get the feeling your p***** off at not gettng everything thats owed to you and are trying to spread rumors...I have well over 300 books - as in real paper and not 0-1's. I love em. Sex is good but there's nothing like the real thing! <laughs> If you get that?When I tell people I spent £30 on a book,I get, "£30 quid! On a book? Are you mad?" And I'm starting to agree with that.Big money for someone... They blame the price on PIRACY! PIRACY my ares!We all know who the real pirates are - well, not all!

  • Hal Licino profile image
    Author

    Hal Licino 8 years ago from Toronto

    Ah, yes. Right in my profile. I come from Toronto, which when I wasn't looking, was annexed by Washington. Yeah. Uh huh. :) Nope, dude, I don't drink but you REALLY have to lay off the ganja as I've read your comments a couple of times and I'm still not sure what you're trying to say. No hostility. Just confusion! :)

  • profile image

    Phatdriver 8 years ago

    Okay, I just looked and you do come from the US. Bets off, okay!

    By the way. This is not my own findings but cannabis is safer than alcohol!

    Do you "DRINK"?

  • profile image

    Phatdriver 8 years ago

    Why the hostility? What wacky tobacky? Is the stuff you have better then?

    Not for me thanx.

    I'll put money on, you come from the USA, huh!

    Real nice taking to you...

  • Hal Licino profile image
    Author

    Hal Licino 8 years ago from Toronto

    Dude, you have got to lay off the wacky tobacky... :)

  • profile image

    Phatdriver 8 years ago

    Hal Lincino

    I understand what you are saying about your book and feel for you and yes, you should get paid a little something, BUT, if EVERYONE, earn a realistic wage there would be no need for torrents sites and the like! Can't, for the life of me, see a middle class person using torrents! Obvious stuff, huh?

    The debate then goes on to, you should have learnt more at school then. And all the other similer arguments. Do me a favour? P2P is here because of the same system. If everyone got straight A's at school who would sweep the roads and clean the bog or serve you food, etc! But there isn't much point bringing this up, is there?

    By the way. If I download a torrent, and like it, I'll buy it. So torrents are not on my computer long at all, and if I were to have a visit, I have the origanal anyway. I primarily use torrents as a try before I buy!..

    Yeah we know who killed JFK, the illuminati and this is why:

    http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=fuiQj1WQzPQ

    Look for the extended video, where the car is two turns before the shooting and you'll be a lot closer to the truth!

    Just passing through. LATER...

  • profile image

    Phatdriver 8 years ago

    DEMONOID ROCKS... <smirks>

  • Hal Licino profile image
    Author

    Hal Licino 8 years ago from Toronto

    ... to catch the hardcore sharers, not the amateurs! DUH!

  • profile image

    8 years ago

    Why the hell would demonoid have extremely limited registrations if they were a trap? The Pirate Bay's model would be much better for them; have it wide open and get millions of people. Demonoid only opens registrations once in a blue moon; you have to get an invite from a current member, otherwise.

  • Hal Licino profile image
    Author

    Hal Licino 9 years ago from Toronto

    It's Brazil now, but check the Internet Wayback Machine and it was UKRAINE. I stated the reg was owned in Brazil... so who are you calling an IDIOT? Have you looked in the mirror lately? :P

  • profile image

    Cythrawl 9 years ago

    Also what's funny......

    http://www.whois.net/whois_new.cgi?d=demonoid&...

    created-date: 2002-10-16updated-date: 2007-12-30registration-expiration-date: 2016-10-16owner-contact: P-RGR400owner-organization: Neurocube.com privacy protection serviceowner-fname: Registration Privateowner-lname: Registration Privateowner-street: SCN Qd. 01, Bloco B, 7° Andarowner-city: Brasiliaowner-state: D.F.owner-zip: 70001-900owner-country: BRowner-phone: +61 37170970owner-email: demonoid.com@neurocube.com Now where is that exactly.... OH LOOK>>>> ITS BRAZIL... IDIOT

  • profile image

    cz231 9 years ago

    Well we will, if all demonoid users suddenly get prosecuted...

  • Hal Licino profile image
    Author

    Hal Licino 9 years ago from Toronto

    Thanks. I guess we will never definitively know. Heck, we still don't know how many different people shot JFK and it's coming up to a half century!

  • profile image

    cz231 9 years ago

    While I do agree with you that there are secret operations the government is involved in, to me, this is unrealistic; although you too make points that make it sound plausible.

  • Hal Licino profile image
    Author

    Hal Licino 9 years ago from Toronto

    cz231, with respect, you make excellent points. But my basic thesis is that the US government has been involved in unimaginable subterfuge. If you doubt that, just check out Operation MHCHAOS or any of the other fun tricks Washington likes to play at it's Langley, VA sandbox. With the huge pressure its under by RIAA, MPAA, etc. I certainly stand by my statements that the DOJ may very well be operating Demonoid and pulling the wool over everyone's eyes.

  • profile image

    cz231 9 years ago

    Sorry about that...I was going to point out about the differences in a third world countries, to the country that is considered a 'world leader', but decided that my post was long enough ;)

  • Hal Licino profile image
    Author

    Hal Licino 9 years ago from Toronto

    Er... since I chose to deviate from the topic... what?

  • profile image

    cz231 9 years ago

    Hacking is one thing, redirecting the DNS is another. Do your research before you go any further...Just a word to the wise.

    To your "This is illegal, that is illegal..." comment, since when does it make sense to break the law, even more severe to catch a less severe crime? It doesn't. The CIA has bigger fish to fry. The media corporations lobbying may be able to influence the FBI to put warnings on movies, and shut down the occasional site, and sue a few over-the-top P2P users, but they don't have enough power to influence something this large. The means don't justify the end. It would cost more to do this, then what they would get out of this. Besides the MPAA is already in enough trouble with their clients, by not sharing the money they did gain in their lawsuits.

    The MPAA and RIAA can already get all of the IP addresses they need to track 99% of P2P users anyway. You're forgetting one thing - this is P2P. They would gain nothing at all, by commiting the numerous crimes of redirecting the DNS, an international agreement,by taking control of demonoid. Do you know why? It's P2P!! The MPAA, can gain access of every single user's IP address on demonoid, just by downloading the torrents themselves! Then they can compare the IP address with each user in the database, and they have every thing the user downloaded, and how much they seeded. So why don't they prosecute all of the millions of P2P users? Well, it's simply impractical, it would cost 10 times the amount they would gain. So I ask again, what motive could they possibly have to redirect the international DNS?

    Oh and since you chose to deviate from the topic,

  • Hal Licino profile image
    Author

    Hal Licino 9 years ago from Toronto

    "DNS is monitored heavily by third parties to prevent anything like this..." so it's perfectly feasible for national elections in Zimbabwe, Venezuela and other rigged casinos to be stolen right under the nose of third party observers but not for the most powerful and richest government in the world to lay a trap to catch P2Pers? This is illegal, that is illegal... Dude, google CIA and talk to me later. This is a Sunday School picnic next to some of the stuff these guys pull! What's that I smell... coffee? Hmm... maybe you should smell it too! :)

  • profile image

    cz231 9 years ago

    Are you joking? You wouldn't be able to prove entrapment? How is the DOJ going to present their evidence without telling how they got the entire IP record? Oh and a 'louse little DNS'? Do you knowwthat the DNS is? It's just the database for every single domain name on the Internet. Yeah, I totally agree, that the US would have no problem redirecty a 'lousy little DNS' (even thought it's the only one). Not to mention, ICANN threatened to revoke VeriSign's license for just redirecting untaken domains to their search engine. In this case, ICANN would be allowing something many degrees worse than what VeriSign did. And they would know if something like this would happen, because the DNS is monitored heavily by third parties to prevent anything like this.

    One other thing. A domain name is considered property. Now if you do a whois, you would see that the same owner of demonoid.com has owned it since it's start in '02, and it doesn't expire until 2016. Also, you're forgetting one thing. It is illegal for the government to distribute files that are copyrighted, just like it is for anybody else. If they are the head of a torrent tracker that is infamous for copyrighted material, then they themselves are commiting a crime!

    I'm sorry Hal, but the allegations and conspiracy you claim is totally far-fetched. Is it I, or you, who "needs to stop looking out the rose colored porthole in your starship because you must not even be living in the same galaxy as the rest of us.:)".

    Look at the facts Hal, not just far fetched speculations.

  • Hal Licino profile image
    Author

    Hal Licino 9 years ago from Toronto

    What kind of naïve Pollyanna would think that the U.S. Government with billions of dollars of slush money, thousands of spooks on its payroll, and entire buildings dedicated to cyber issues wouldn't be able to redirect a lousy little DNS? I guess the same naïve Pollyanna who thinks that anyone could ever prove entrapment in a case like this. I'm no professional conspiracy theorist, but cz231 you need to stop looking out the rose colored porthole in your starship because you must not even be living in the same galaxy as the rest of us. :)

  • profile image

    cz231 9 years ago

    What a load of BS!

    The DOJ isn't in charge of the DNS...or wait, did the US all of a sudden turn communist and take over the world? My bad! Last time I checked, an IP that is traceable to the Ukraine, means it's in Ukraine! Redirection or not, any one who visits demonoid is receiving files from Ukraine. It's as simple as that.

    Not only that, but last time I checked, isn't intentional entrapment by a government official illegal, and invalid in court? Not to mention, any one involved would lose their job, if something like this actually existed!

    Jonno.Norton - Private torrent trackers are even easier to prosecute. The MPAA and RIAA can hardly ever track peoples IP addresses in public torrent sites, because the statistics of users aren't recorded. This allows for a higher level of anonymity. In public trackers, they might find your IP address downloading one thing, but that isn't worth the legal cost. On the other hand, in a private tracker, the MPAA and RIAA can just click on your user name and receive all of your statistics of what you've downloaded.

  • profile image

    Jonno.Norton 9 years ago

    Oh man! Great hub, this is such a relevant question right now. I don't use public torrent sites for exactly that reason. The private ones are harder to locate, but worth the efforts if you can get onto one. They operate in almost complete obscurity to the public eye. And the quality of files and help you get on them is far superior.

  • Hal Licino profile image
    Author

    Hal Licino 9 years ago from Toronto

    I have an international bestselling book translated into a dozen languages. The book is one of the top 500 downloads from rapidshare. That means that there are thousands of people reading my book that didn't buy it at the bookstore or on amazon, but just got it for free. On one hand, I'm happy that my book is reaching thousands of more people than it ordinarily would have, but on the other hand, I sure wouldn't mind getting at least SOME money out of them! I think that's only fair!

  • profile image

    Adam York 9 years ago

    Interesting article. I like to read about things like this. I think this kind of thing is stealing paychecks from hard working actors. Though I do wish it would be lawful to rip DVDs I buy to my computer just like my CDs.

  • guidebaba profile image

    guidebaba 9 years ago from India

    Innovative and very new idea. I appreciate.

  • Hal Licino profile image
    Author

    Hal Licino 9 years ago from Toronto

    It's as suspicious as it can be. I think only a fool would use that site today, but if you look at the site's activity there are thousands of such fools doing that each and every day. I hope they all have good lawyers and lots of money for legal fees!

  • Froggy213 profile image

    Greg Boudonck 9 years ago from On A Mountain In Puerto Rico

    great info--I would be willing to bet it's a trap to catch downloaders