Seems like a lot of thinly veiled sympathy here today for a person who, even Steve Jobs would have said, is a thief.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Helped FBI Identify Alleged Owner of World's Largest Torrent Site
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I find your use of statistics here troubling.
Because jail time is an appropriate response to little Johnny wanting to listen to a hit song? Major players already face serious consequences (evidenced by this thread) but even the RIAA has publicly stated they have no interest in pursuing individual downloaders anymore even for civil damages. There are alternate paths forward, your idea is extreme.
The key piece of evidence that led authorities to Vaulin appeared to come when Apple handed over his personal details after investigators matched an IP address used to log in to the KAT Facebook page with one linked to an iTunes purchase.
Filed in a U.S. District Court in Chicago, the criminal complaint reads: "Records provided by Apple showed that tirm@me.com conducted an iTunes transaction using IP Address 109.86.226.203 on or about July 31, 2015. The same IP Address was used on the same day to login into the KAT Facebook."
What makes you think the ISP wasn't involved? They tend to log what machine was using what IP address at any given time. And they tend to get subpoenas for "what authenticated customer account was using a specific IP address at a specific time" with some frequency. This is not a new thing.
[doublepost=1469115521][/doublepost]
No, he can't. He thinks throwing the word "statistically" in there bolsters his case, but his argument is not logical.
Last edited:
Sounds like you don't understand that Apple has always complied with lawful warrants signed by a judge that seek information about subjects under criminal investigation that Apple has in its possession and can provide. Like most other tech companies.
Last edited:
But lucky for you I'm a big supporter of those with mental challenges.
I've also corrected Tim's last name for you which I assume was just an autocorrect issue due to your frequent use of that word.
How is Apple not protecting your privacy?
If you are under criminal investigation and Apple is presented with a lawful warrant signed by a judge to produce information in Apple's possession, then by law Apple must comply.
The mistake was using an iTunes account on Facebook, KAT
Who does that ??
This is one reason why i never use the same account to sign-up or login to anything.... That goes with Google as well. Keep 'em separate, even if it need having to signup/login separately.
U know what u'r doing, so lets do it properly.
Apple does what it has to do... By saying Apple should not comply, would mean people are then free to loot stores without the care in the world of getting arrested.
Who does that ??
This is one reason why i never use the same account to sign-up or login to anything.... That goes with Google as well. Keep 'em separate, even if it need having to signup/login separately.
U know what u'r doing, so lets do it properly.
Apple does what it has to do... By saying Apple should not comply, would mean people are then free to loot stores without the care in the world of getting arrested.
Apple values profit. This torrent site was probably taking potential revenue from iTunes.
iTunes Match was NEVER intended to legitimize your illegal MP3 collection, despite millions of small-time thieves believing/wishing it to be so.
[doublepost=1469116383][/doublepost]
Points for encouraging a criminal to follow best security practices, but you lose those points for not understanding the difference between an IP address (which was used to track him) and an account.
Well. when Apple states on their site "you can match *all* your songs..." it's pretty hard to NOT take that seriously.
We don't have all the details yet but from what I've pieced together it would be more like:
A) FBI requests Facebook provide details for the KAT fan page. I'd assume with a warrant as it wouldn't be too hard to get given the obvious purpose of the fan page.
B) FBI obtained an @me.com email address through a variety of sources (such as the domain registration)
C) FBI requests Apple provide details for the @me.com email address. Again, almost certainly with a warrant.
D) FBI matches up the logs from both datasets and finds the same IP address used to log into Facebook and Apple on the same day.
E) FBI continues to build case (although the Apple bit seems to be the attention grabbing headline there's better evidence from other sources and this case probably would have been prosecuted without the Apple data)
I was very concerned about how they initially connected the dots to Apple but after another user shared a more in depth article there's a reasonable chain, it does not appear to be sourced via bulk data collection or some sort of fishing expedition (Apple/MS/Whoever, give us all your data for IP X.x.x.x). There's an outside chance of parallel construction here but I'm an Occum's Razor fan rather than a Tin Foil Hat enthusiast (generally).
[doublepost=1469116441][/doublepost]
Reportedly the staff was all on GenToo
Because thievery is highly subjective—or at least, any given act must be vigourously scrutinised before deciding on such a judgment.
I'm not condoning or condemning any particular act, merely answering a question.
No, the pathetic part is the overwhelming support in this thread for IP theft. Apple, along with every other tech company and ISP will hand over data about who owns an account, or used a given IP address at a given time, when presented with a court order demanding said info. This is obeying the law. What Apple won't do, and rightly so, is give government agencies the tools to spy on all their citizen's private conversations whenever the government feels like doing so (which would be all the time).
Isn't that like saying "Ignore the big time drug dealer and the central money launderer. Find all the individual crack addicts instead."
Not sure if this is sarcastic but if you knew the basics of Jobs' biography you would have laughed at this statement.
Shame on Apple for doing this and shame on the FBI for worrying about some torrent site while terrorists are running amok in the world.
So if the gas station offers to sell you gas for "your" car, and it turns out you stole the car, does buying the gas make the car legitimately yours? Likely the interpretation Apple had in mind was "you can match all *your* songs". But thieves were looking for absolution for their crimes. Some of us actually do legitimately own all the music on our devices, you know, not everybody is a thief.
How is this petty when the guy is making millions facilitating theft? At the very least, he is guilty of being an accomplice in millions of "little crimes" since he created and maintained a place where people can easily commit crimes and did absolutely nothing to make sure crimes aren't being committed. He would make absolutely no money from helping people share legit files when legit sites like Drop Box, Box, WeTransfer, Hightail, etc. etc. already exist for people to share large files cheaply or even free depending on the file size and storage needs. Supposedly, torrents were created as a way for people to share large files they are legally-entitled to share. Immediately, it was used to violate copyright laws and it is very difficult to track down all the criminals who use it. I LOVE hearing these criminals getting punished!