X-53mph Posted February 6 Author Share Posted February 6 11 minutes ago, PhonoBrainer said: Hey 53, which site did you originally post your song to, even just as a Private link? Was it Bandlab? Or Soundcloud or something else? Following with interest . . . First on SoundCloud, but privately. The link was then posted on this forum for others to hear the song in progress. I've never published on BandLab. The song had also already been sent to streaming services about a month ago with a scheduled release time of mid Feb. I release through Landr, so if there has been any theft, I have the song ID code ready. I tried Shazaming my track and got no hits, so I'm hoping that means it hasn't been ripped and uploaded under a different name. Jeeezzz the internet is full of pickpockets. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glenn Stanton Posted February 6 Share Posted February 6 5 hours ago, craigb said: And ProtonVPN has a free option and they don't log your information. sure they don't log it... pretty sure many (esp EU or any echelon member states) require it to do business in their country. i love the TV shows where they cannot trace the information. of course they can. now if you want untraceable (but unreliable) then using non-TCP/IP protocols is the way to go although a lot of routers block those, using command protocols to signal get around a lot of that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
X-53mph Posted February 6 Author Share Posted February 6 18 minutes ago, Glenn Stanton said: sure they don't log it... pretty sure many (esp EU or any echelon member states) require it to do business in their country. i love the TV shows where they cannot trace the information. of course they can. now if you want untraceable (but unreliable) then using non-TCP/IP protocols is the way to go although a lot of routers block those, using command protocols to signal get around a lot of that. Do you happen to know how websites can defend against scammers signing up and spamming? I'm asking on behalf of someone who has seen their site swamped with spam which seems to get around all the security checks. We could message privately if you want. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pwal³ Posted February 6 Share Posted February 6 25 minutes ago, 53mph said: The link was then posted on this forum for others to hear the song in progress. well, this forum isn't the most secure place... hope you sort it out 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
X-53mph Posted February 6 Author Share Posted February 6 1 minute ago, pwal³ said: well, this forum isn't the most secure place... hope you sort it out I had hoped there were only good folk in this shaded corner of the web. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pwal³ Posted February 6 Share Posted February 6 6 minutes ago, 53mph said: I had hoped there were only good folk in this shaded corner of the web. did you miss all the recent spamming hoo-hars? (not just today) i'd suggest "private messaging" is not done via a forum, or even via internet hope you sort your thing out /goodluck 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glenn Stanton Posted February 6 Share Posted February 6 (edited) 53 minutes ago, 53mph said: Do you happen to know how websites can defend against scammers signing up and spamming? I'm asking on behalf of someone who has seen their site swamped with spam which seems to get around all the security checks. security is more than simply setting controls - you need process as well. authentication of the user and time/posting limits initially. so if you need to reply to an email or text message with the verification code before signing in, and then some profile updates. these two steps are not a hardship for real people but for spammers and bots it has a cost to get around - time, effort, and/or money to program, hire spam teams etc. and limit to 2 topic posts in the first 24 hours w/ reply restricted to those topics. infrastructure (hardware and software) can be used to reduce session re-use in spamming and other attacks. for example, you're login is a singleton which applies to all other activity on the site, multiple logins even from different devices do not count as anything other than 1. 🙂 an example is gmail - i can login in from multiple devices but the session is effectively 1 session for all devices. this way real people can ask for help and respond without limiting them too much. no one should really need to have more than 2 topics initially. then after the post, a minimum 1 reply to a given topic (presumably after someone else has responded, it's not a copy or high % copy of the first post, and there is no "bump" post until after say 4 hours), then can now be given access to post 2 more topics etc and after then after the posting of those 4 topics and minimum 1 reply (like "thanks") to a response on their thread, you can free them from initial "jail" and become proper members. heuristics matter. then removing spam topics is lower cost to the business. no true way to stop all attacks but you can make it more costly to the attackers. secondly if those spammers are using real businesses and/or products in the spam, feel free to have your legal folks (or a friend who has mastered properly scary language) to drop them a note about the reporting to government agencies and pending legal jeopardy. just in case the business actually didn't hire the spammers. those who care may take an interest in helping to stop it. Edited February 6 by Glenn Stanton 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pwal³ Posted February 6 Share Posted February 6 1 hour ago, Glenn Stanton said: no true way to stop all attacks 2 or 3 step authentication, but then we're getting into bank mode just for a forum Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
craigb Posted February 6 Share Posted February 6 57 minutes ago, pwal³ said: 2 or 3 step authentication, but then we're getting into bank mode just for a forum Wait... Have you see the Deals sub-forum??? 🤔😜 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glenn Stanton Posted February 6 Share Posted February 6 3 hours ago, pwal³ said: 2 or 3 step authentication, but then we're getting into bank mode just for a forum no i don't think you need to go that far once you have the initial authentication and profile update steps. then simply limiting the number of initial threads and replies will enable basic help and let the moderators cleanup spam threads and related reposts. having multifactor authentication on every login would be painful and not really needed for this venue. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OutrageProductions Posted February 6 Share Posted February 6 Maybe it would be possible, when first setting up an account, to require a Captcha and return email addy authentication. Then we would be able to know if it is a hooman or a bot. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
X-53mph Posted February 6 Author Share Posted February 6 4 minutes ago, OutrageProductions said: Maybe it would be possible, when first setting up an account, to require a Captcha and return email addy authentication. Then we would be able to know if it is a hooman or a bot. That's what my friend's site has, but it doesn't seem to stop the 500+ fake accounts that are being opened every day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
craigb Posted February 6 Share Posted February 6 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glenn Stanton Posted February 6 Share Posted February 6 14 minutes ago, 53mph said: That's what my friend's site has, but it doesn't seem to stop the 500+ fake accounts that are being opened every day. that way, beyond the simple captcha, you need some intermediate steps like email verification + profile update - two things not done in the sign up. then post limiting. again the idea is increase the expense of the attack while making cleanup easier. obvious stuff like filtering for garbage thread names (like we see here with lots of extraneous characters typical users would not use). and infrastructure - single session per account regardless of device. this last one prevents many different devices, paths, etc using the same account to spam in an effort to bypass the authentication and manual steps and limited posting. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mettelus Posted February 6 Share Posted February 6 7 hours ago, 53mph said: I had hoped there were only good folk in this shaded corner of the web. Your situation is just plain crazy and I hope you get it sorted. Just to the above comment, bear in mind that anything published to the internet can be seen by anyone. People do not even need to be members to take things not requiring a log in, so even the songs forum here can be an open market to people filching things. Without a digital trail it is hard to pursue recourse, but if you can get the name/identity of the "artist" that took it, then it is easier to focus resources toward that end. The FTC doesn't pursue "one off" situations, but if they start getting inundated with complaints against the same source, they will. It is worth reporting this once you have enough information, so that it is at least on record and can bubble up in due time if it continues to progress. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
craigb Posted February 7 Share Posted February 7 3 hours ago, mettelus said: Your situation is just plain crazy and I hope you get it sorted. Just to the above comment, bear in mind that anything published to the internet can be seen by anyone. People do not even need to be members to take things not requiring a log in, so even the songs forum here can be an open market to people filching things. Without a digital trail it is hard to pursue recourse, but if you can get the name/identity of the "artist" that took it, then it is easier to focus resources toward that end. The FTC doesn't pursue "one off" situations, but if they start getting inundated with complaints against the same source, they will. It is worth reporting this once you have enough information, so that it is at least on record and can bubble up in due time if it continues to progress. Yep. Any basic Google search will show these posts! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
craigb Posted February 7 Share Posted February 7 Hmm... Actually, I think this could be turned into a money-making venture! YOU have all the original tracks, mixes, etc. and should have no problem proving it's your song (they certainly won't!), so... Since "they" have the claim, you should be able to find out exactly who "they" are and then sue them! Not just for "lost revenue" but for damages! Especially if they're tied to a music agency. This could mean a lot of money for your lawyer you! 😁 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
X-53mph Posted February 7 Author Share Posted February 7 5 hours ago, craigb said: Hmm... Actually, I think this could be turned into a money-making venture! YOU have all the original tracks, mixes, etc. and should have no problem proving it's your song (they certainly won't!), so... Since "they" have the claim, you should be able to find out exactly who "they" are and then sue them! Not just for "lost revenue" but for damages! Especially if they're tied to a music agency. This could mean a lot of money for your lawyer you! 😁 So far, I don't even know who they are beyond the name FUGA. They have not responded to my counter dispute, and they have not even supplied the name or the piece or artist. YouTube says the piece has not been made publicly available. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mettelus Posted February 7 Share Posted February 7 1 hour ago, 53mph said: So far, I don't even know who they are beyond the name FUGA. They have not responded to my counter dispute, and they have not even supplied the name or the piece or artist. YouTube says the piece has not been made publicly available. It is quite possible that FUGA may be the entity directly involved in this, i.e., there is no "artist." There is certainly no shortage of questionable ethics practices that have landed corporate leaders in prison, and I would suspect a script/algorithm at play here more than an "individual." If you want to pull the thread on this one faster, I would notify YouTube that you plan on filing an FTC complaint due to past reports of FUGA and intend to have the "digital trail" examined by someone with the authority to delve into both FUGA and YouTube to find out exactly how this occurred and the mechanisms they used to achieve it with the intent of making it not happen again (to anyone). YouTube is definitely subject to US laws and infringement. I am not sure about FUGA with its EU HQ, but the question more pressing here is "How can YouTube allow an 'undisclosed entity' claim ownership of a work when the actual owner comes forward to refute that?" You at least deserve the artist's name, but if it is FUGA as a whole, that ball of yarn will unravel in short order. What you are experiencing is very similar to people who are getting their work stolen to feed AI learning. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
X-53mph Posted February 7 Author Share Posted February 7 This might drag on as YouTube give the claimant 30 days to review the counter-claim and respond. Thanks everyone for your replies and suggestions. I will look into legally pursing any copyright infringement as it is something I feel very strongly about. I also happen to know a lawyer specialized in music copyright. He may have to get involved at some point. Thanks everyone 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now