I am a huge fan of the content that Revision3 puts out. Although I may not watch every show they produce/distribute, I think some of the best “TV” actually comes from this internet company, with such examples as The Totally Rad Show, Diggnation, Tekzilla, iFanboy, and popSiren. I also frequent their forums to interact with the community of viewers. This weekend, however, I was thwarted in my many attempts to access their site; I was not alone. It turns out that, over the weekend, Revision3 was the target of a Denial-of-Service (DoS) attack which severely crippled their servers. That, alone, is really not that newsworthy since these attacks happen constantly all over the web for a variety of reasons. What makes this example special is who perpetrated the attack and the suspected reasons behind why they would do such a thing.

In a lengthy and incredibly well-written blog post on their website, Revision3 CEO Jim Louderback details exactly what this DoS was, how it happened, and why it brought down their server. But he also goes on to describe how the evidence the attackers left behind led them to a subsidiary of Artistdirect called MediaDefender. MediaDefender is a company that, as ars technica points out, intentionally poisons peer-to-peer (P2P) traffic in a purported effort to fight piracy, and their clients have included Sony, Universal Music, the RIAA, and the MPAA. Now, Revision3 uses the Bittorrent P2P protocol to distribute its large volume of high-definition content (namely its shows) manageably and efficiently to its consumers. MediaOffender, ahem, MediaDefender had been injecting torrents into Revision3’s tracking server for months until the back door was found and Revision3 deauthorized non-Revision3 torrents. This caused MediaDouchefender, dammit, MediaDefender’s servers to attack Revision3’s servers by pinging them 8000 times every second, effectively bringing Revision3 to a crashing halt. It is interesting to note here how Louderback phrases this: “Revision3 suffered measurable harm to its business….” This certainly sounds like someone is laying groundwork for a lawsuit. Additionally, the FBI is investigating the incident so hopefully there will be repercussions for such an incredibly reprehensible and entirely indefensible attack on a business by an organization, funded by competing media interests, whose tactic to “fight piracy” is to undermine undeniably legal technology. I…am…so…angry…

Edit:
Here’s more of my feelings in the form of a comment (currently awaiting moderation) I left on Molly Wood’s Culture of Ownership blog:

I think there’s a little piece of the story that many people may be missing so let me quote from MediaDouchefenders’ website: “This last year, we have been leveraging our anti-piracy technology to market and promote on various Peer-to-Peer Networks.” My guess is that they not only put decoy torrents on Rev3’s network, but they have also likely been injecting torrents to “market and promote” their old media clients by hijacking/attacking their direct competition in new media. I also do not think it is coincidence that Revision3 was attacked given the founders’ connection to Digg, and we all know how much the AACS LA consortium (including MediaOffender client Sony) loved Digg after that encryption key was released. I don’t know. Maybe I’m thinking too hard, but that’s just how I see things.

Ah, where to begin (and, no, this isn’t an April Fools’ joke)… OK, Deutsche Telekom (owners of the T-Mobile brand) has apparently sought to trademark the color magenta and is seeking this in the Netherlands, a very “trademark-friendly” nation. Now, one may ask oneself, “Self, what does this have to do with me over here in the good ol’ US of A?” Well, it seems that Deutsche Telekom has demanded that Engadget discontinue its use of magenta on its website, the same website that essentially offers up free advertising for T-Mobile whenever it reports on their products. In defiance of the “request” and in the spirit of today, Engadget has gone all pink.

Oh, and lest you think that Deutsche Telekom invented the color magenta, I direct your attention to this passage from the IHT article linked above:

Magenta is “a color that dates from 1859 when a small Italian city by the same name was site of the battle in which French and Piedmontese troops defeated the Austrian Army. A new reddish pigment was discovered the same year and was named magenta, to mark the bloodshed in the town of Magenta.”

Is this the world we live in that corporate machines can copyright a color created 150 years ago and demand that the color not be used by anyone else? I don’t think I can adequately put into words the rage that builds every time I think about this. I will, however, direct your attention to a post on The Culture of Ownership, a blog which essentially sprang to life as a way for Molly Wood to elaborate on her frequent Buzz Out Loud rants.

Free the Magenta!!