A Brief History of the Oink Trial Pt1
So the oink trial is over, and Alan won.
In a larger sense, many of us won. The Oink raid and trial was, at it’s essence, a show-trial, every bit a spectacle trial (or ’spectrial’) as last years Pirate Bay one – if not moreso. After all, the Swedish Police didn’t do the raid accompanied by TV cameras – in fact they covered up cameras – but otherwise it was similar.
So let’s go through the case. It started with a raid, covered by the BBC in a regional news program that covered the talking points of the victim (the IFPI/BPI) and the police. Worse, the police, in the form of Detective Inspector Colin Green, made definitive statements that were at odds with the facts.
“There’s approximately 180,000 members, who pay subscriptions to enter the website and download any music that’s available. And music that’s been made available on that website, it’s pre-release, it hasn’t gone into the record shops”
As we all know, subscriptions were not required. Nor was music downloaded from the site. As for the pre-release claims, a small percentage may have been, but the better question is where it came from, presumably a music industry person that decided to upload, and not acquired by Mr Ellis himself.
- The ominous warning put on Oink.cd
The domain was also hijacked, by the IFPI and BPI, displaying their logos and an intimidating message. Interestingly, the representatives of the alleged victims, the IFPI and BPI, were not only participating in a criminal investigation, but headlining it. A definite conflict of interest at the very least, but the hijacking of private property owned by the defendant, by the accuser, to post intimidation and attempt to influence people, is clearly an attempt to prejudice the trial. 3 days later, thankfully, the website was redirected, but it shows the levels of influence these industry bodies have over the police.
Meanwhile, Alan Ellis, was released, and spent the next 11 months on bail before being finally charged with “Conspiracy to defraud the music industry”. The UK lobby group FACT has a description of the offence which actually pretty much gave the case as a win for Ellis (and archive.org says the page is still the same as in May 06). The specimen charge they give reads
On a day between the … Day of… 19.. And the … Day of… 19.. In the county of… And elsewhere, conspired with … And with persons unknown to defraud the copyright owners of various video films by marketing/distributing/manufacturing infringing copies of video films contrary to the common law
No-one was defrauded of films, they still had them. The only way the charge could work, is if the claim is that the copyright owners had been deprived of money they might have got. Great, except that argument can be made by anyone you’re in competition with. Oh, and copyright, not a property – it’s an assignable right.
Next time – the build up, the users, and the pre-trial playabout.I made Wikipedia!
Earlier this week, I had a slight surprise. Someone had actually created a wikipedia article about me. Great! Nice to think I was considered notable enough in the Pirate Party movement to get a page. It’s a bit light on facts though, so I thought I’d add some here (since I couldn’t add them to wikipedia, as that’s a “conflict of Interest”
- I’m married with 3 kids
- I was born June 24th 1980
- I used to work on BattleBots (I went from an assorted crew minion at the Long Beach event and Season 1.0, to coordinating the pits in 2.0, and was a safety inspector in 4.0 – passes are on this VASTLY out of date page from 03)
- I also took part in Robot Wars, as part of Team Liverdyne. We ran the Middleweight Hard Cheese (Middleweight champ 98-2000) and the Heavyweight Viper01
- Hard Cheese can also be briefly seen in the Spaced Episode “Mettle” – I am visible a bit more, as one of the slo-mo’d solo cheerers during the episodes battle.
And for those that want to know what ‘ktetch’ (more properly “K’Tetch”) is about – it’s a the name of a character I developed for an RPGin the mid-90s. It’s of Klingon origin, and it’s very handy as an on-line user name, as no-one else uses it.
Protected: Christmas lights shortage over?
Oink and the Technicolour Lie-coat
One of the core philosophies of reporting is that you only print what you’re sure of. If you don’t know, don’t say. That way Libel lies.
Someone really should tell the Northern Echo (Update; see comments, it’s written by the Press Association) that. Today, they ran a piece about the restarting of Alan Ellis’ trial. Alan, if you didn’t know, was associated with oink, the music bittorrent tracker. If you know about bittorrent, and the case in particular, it’s a real head-slap moment. The majority of the piece appears to have been copied from the RIAA/BPI filings made to police, and 30 seconds research (even to past news stories covering this case) would prove the lie.
Let’s look at some of the errors
A man suspected of operating one of the world’s biggest pirate music websites from a bedsit had his trial adjourned today.
I’m pretty sure the site was operating from a Hosting company. Despite claims made by ISPs, their residential connections aren’t all that fast.
“Computer equipment and documents were seized from his home in Middlesbrough in 2007 and he was charged by police with conspiracy to defraud the music industry and copyright infringement.”
Actually, things seem cut and dried, but it’s not quiet accurate (again). The raids and seizures were made in October 2007 (and ‘coincidentally’ with a BBC camera unit in tow) but Mr Elis was not charged until 11 months later. With Conspiracy to Defraud the Music Industry – a charge unheard of before (possibly because it doesn’t actually exist?)
“Police and music industry investigators suggested that he could have made hundreds of thousands of pounds a year from the OiNK website, which he set up in 2004.
“Could have”, yes. Did do, no. Over the same time period he *could* also have murdered 300 people, or run for the House of Commons. It’s actually music investigators (the plaintiffs) making that accusation first – that’s one of the things that triggered the raid.
“He is the first person in the UK ever to be charged with illegal file-sharing. “
Oh, not even close. We could cover Barwiska (although that’s a civil case). The uploaders to oink that police arrested as a result of this raid, who were sentenced a year ago would also probably dispute that.
The OiNK website was a complex computer programme created to help share music and audio files amongst a community of online users.
The oink website was a fairly simple website which accessed a tracker database backend. It’s no more complex than Amazon, or any other database-driven site, and is certainly not a computer program, complex or otherwise.
Members of the community would seed the system by uploading music files or leech from it by downloading music files.
Sorry, They would seed torrents, which are independent of the tracker or ’system’. Likewise, they would leech from torrents, using bandwidth from other users, not doing anything with the ’system’ directly.
To do so they had to register their email address and a unique user name, and make donations by debit or credit card to ensure full access and maximum usage of the site.
Yes, yes, and no. Donations were not required – this is back to the ‘hundreds of thousands of pounds’ argument above. Telling the lie that you HAD to send money, means there’s a minimum financial value associated with each user, which can be counted, which then leads to the money claims above. Since there was no requirement to pay to use the site, the rest of the argument falls down badly.
The technology used – a method known as BitTorrent file-sharing – had three main advantages: It broke files down into small pieces of data, which made that data more easy to share, giving a higher quality download in a shorter time.
First, that seems like only one advantage to me, and a nonsensical one at that. Higher quality means bigger file, regardless of protocol used to share, which means LONGER time not shorter. What I think they mean to say was “it breaks files down into smaller chunks of data (just like all data transfers do) which can then be distributed with a far greater efficiency than using any other protocol”
The beauty of the system was that each time a person leeched – or downloaded – an album from the internet, they became a seeder from whom other OiNK users could download the same album.
True, but only as long as the specific torrent in question was not only still in the persons client, but actively running as well, not permanently, as is suggested.
Early online file-sharing systems were so slow it could be more expensive to download an album than to buy it in a shop.
I would really LOVE to know how they came up with this statement. I suppose if you were on dialup, calling a non-local Point of Presence that was not free, you could maybe rack up some charges (7.9p/minute at current BT national call rates). Dialup (when I had it with blueyonder in 99-2002) would do approx 1MB every 5 minutes, and a 3 minute song is about 3MB. 15 minutes per track comes to 118.5p. In that way, yes it’s more expensive than 99c from itunes, BUT, it’s less than the cost of going to HMV or Virgin, and buying a single for 10 songs, its £11.80 – which is less than I seem to recall albums costing now, or then (and we’re not factoring in travelling costs), so another false claim.
But advances in technology meant OiNK users could download very high quality music files, very quickly.
Oink users, iTunes users, BBC iPlayer users- that’s not something specific to Oink. The technological advances are in broadband rollout and speed, bcause if you’re still on dialup, bittorrent won’t be any faster – would almost certainly be SLOWER in fact.
Ellis’ trial at Middlesbrough Crown Court was adjourned until tomorrow, for legal arguments.
Wow, they managed it! They managed an entire sentence that was wholly accurate.
You want to know what’s quite fun about this piece though? Since it’s a newspaper, distribbuted in the area of the trial, and which contains a severely slanted perspective on the case, including a lot of factual errors, it could be considered prejudicial to the case, and cause a mistrial. Nor is it the first time such action has happened in this case. Immediately after the raid the domain was hijacked by the music industry, long before charges were made, let alone a day in court.
Fun eh? I’ve sent a link to this to the News Editor of The Northern Echo, I wonder what his response will be.
UPDATE:i’ve just been informed that the Mirror is also running the exact same story Wonder what their editor thinks of it.
UPDATE 2: Just has word from Alan “didn’t even get my job right.” – nuff said really.
Terrorism – How Not to Deal With It
Terrorism. An innocuous word to some, but it makes US government officials lose their collective minds. In an orgy of CYA (cover your ass) clusterf*cks, they manage to turn even the simplest blunders into terrorist activities.
Let’s first reflect on the actual DANGERS of terrorism. As I wrote about a few months ago, there are more deaths, on average, EVERY MONTH on US roads, than in every terrorist attack targeting at least one US Citizen from 1994-2005 combined, and that over the same period, mother nature – in the form of tornadoes, floods, earthquakes, snow/ice and even plain old heat – killed twice as many over the same time period as the dreaded T-word. Fivethirtyeight.com also breaks down air-based terrorist incidents by miles travelled, time travelled, and number of passengers involved. Their results?
one terrorist incident per 16,553,385 departures.
one terrorist incident per 11,569,297,667 miles flown
one terrorist incident per 27,221,877 hours airborne.
And
the odds of being on given departure which is the subject of a terrorist incident have been 1 in 10,408,947 over the past decade
You can read their source data and maths on their article.
So, on Christmas Day, we have ‘an attempted bomb plot’ (which is included in the figures above) that ended up fizzling. This is 8 years after the complete overhaul of air travel ’security’ to prevent it from happening. After it happened, there were more TSA CYA’s, including a security directive which went out to over 10,000 people worldwide. When it was made public by two different bloggers, the TSA came down on them. For making public a government document. ‘Strangely’, after that was made public, both the directive, and the subpoenas served on the bloggers have gone away. That indicates that there was fear of the public reaction – fear of the exposure of their tactics and methods.
Then there was the lovely incident yesterday, at Newark airport. Someone got from the public side to the secure side, and caused the entire airport to go into lock down. The ‘best’ part of all? Hours later they still don’t know who. It is nothing more than a clear case of TSA incompetence, and lack of common sense.
What makes it even more of a farce was the White House’s weekly address, published a day earlier.
Let’s never forget what has always carried us through times of trial, including those attacks eight Septembers ago.
Instead of giving in to fear and cynicism, let’s renew that timeless American spirit of resolve and confidence and optimism.
Fear is the entire reason the TSA exists; and it is what has been carrying the US through the last 8 years. It’s been the rational for a lot of legislation over the past 8 years, and it’s the bread-and-butter of both this Administration and the last one. The US Federal code even defines (18 U.S.C. §2331) as using violent acts to, amongst other things -intimidate or coerce a populace. Brandishing weapons, detaining people – both can be considered violent acts. By the circular reasoning, that the US Government loves, it gets even better. The THREAT of a terrorist act is in fact a terrorist act. If you say “unless xyz happens, there will be an attack”, that is a terrorist threat.
Now we’re down to how the Department of Homeland Security was created, and that’s a whole other story. I leave you with something I saw on twitter, ‘re-tweeted‘ by my good friend, and political blodder, Aaron Landry, from the KARE news station in the twin cities.
RT @solace: RT @kare11: NWA flight diverted because of Christmas ornament http://bit.ly/6fWkLp really? this isn’t an Onion headline?
No, it’s just the state of “Anti-terrorist” paranoia in a climate of security theatre, and that’s pretty sad.
Recommended Bittorrent/µTorrent Settings
As I’ve shown already, Oftentimes people do REALLY stupid things with their client settings. I mean beyond ordinary ’stupid’. Private tracker sites are one of the main reasons for this. The all-fired obsession with seeding as much as possible, because of the power of the intangible and all-powerful ’ratio’ that must be obeyed, and adhered to at all costs.
Thus I felt that I should reprint this, as first developed by a friend of mine, a µTorrent forum moderator that goes by the name of Switeck. This was first publshed on the µTorrent forum, but in the spirit of getting it out there, and easily found, he agreed to this reprint. These settings work for pubic AND private trackers (and work better for private trackers than the ones suggested by those trackers in most cases)
Thanks again to Switeck
<<<< Begin>>>>
Almost NO Cable line or ADSL line should use settings higher than 2 mbit/sec upload speed!
This link explains my chart further: http://forum.utorrent.com/viewtopic.php … 50#p422150
╔════════════════╦═══════════╦═══════════╦══════════╗
║CONNECTION TYPE ║ UPLOAD ║ CONNECTIONS ║MAX ACTIVE║
║(UPLOAD MAXIMUM)║Limit│Slots║ Torr│ MAX ║Torr│Down.║
╠════════════════╬═════╪═════╬═════╪═════╬════╪═════╣
║ DEFAULT ║ 20│ 3║ 30│ 40║ 2│ 1║
║ Dial-up (28.8k)║ 2│ 1║ 4│ 5║ 1│ 1║
║ Dial-up (56k) ║ 3│ 1║ 5│ 6║ 1│ 1║
║Single ISDN(64k)║ 5│ 2║ 10│ 15║ 1│ 1║
║ Dual ISDN(128k)║ 9│ 3║ 20│ 25║ 1│ 1║
║ 64 kbit/sec ║ 5│ 2║ 20│ 25║ 1│ 1║
║ 80 kbit/sec ║ 6│ 2║ 25│ 30║ 1│ 1║
║ 96 kbit/sec ║ 7│ 3║ 25│ 30║ 1│ 1║
║ 128 kbit/sec ║ 9│ 3║ 30│ 35║ 1│ 1║
║ 160 kbit/sec ║ 13│ 3║ 30│ 40║ 1│ 1║
║ 192 kbit/sec ║ 17│ 3║ 30│ 50║ 2│ 1║
║ 224 kbit/sec ║ 20│ 3║ 35│ 55║ 2│ 1║
║ 256 kbit/sec ║ 22│ 3║ 35│ 60║ 2│ 1║
║ 320 kbit/sec ║ 29│ 3║ 35│ 80║ 3│ 2║
║ 384 kbit/sec ║ 35│ 4║ 40│ 90║ 3│ 2║
║ 448 kbit/sec ║ 40│ 4║ 40│ 100║ 3│ 2║
║ 512 kbit/sec ║ 47│ 4║ 40│ 100║ 4│ 3║
║ 640 kbit/sec ║ 60│ 4║ 45│ 120║ 4│ 3║
║ 700 kbit/sec ║ 65│ 4║ 45│ 140║ 5│ 4║
║ 768 kbit/sec ║ 72│ 5║ 50│ 150║ 5│ 4║
║ 800 kbit/sec ║ 75│ 5║ 50│ 160║ 6│ 5║
║ 900 kbit/sec ║ 82│ 5║ 55│ 180║ 6│ 5║
║ 1 mbit/sec ║ 92│ 6║ 60│ 200║ 7│ 6║
║ 1.5 mbit/sec ║ 140│ 7║ 60│ 250║ 8│ 7║
║ 2 mbit/sec ║ 186│ 8║ 60│ 300║ 10│ 8║
║ 2.5 mbit/sec ║ 250│ 8║ 60│ 320║ 12│ 8║
║ 3 mbit/sec ║ 300│ 9║ 65│ 330║ 13│ 9║
║ 4 mbit/sec ║ 400│ 10║ 70│ 350║ 14│ 10║
║ 5 mbit/sec ║ 500│ 10║ 70│ 400║ 15│ 10║
║ 8 mbit/sec ║ 800│ 15║ 80│ 450║ 17│ 12║
║ 10 mbit/sec ║ 1000│ 20║ 100│ 500║ 20│ 15║
║ 15 mbit/sec ║ 1500│ 22║ 100│ 550║ 23│ 17║
║ 20 mbit/sec ║ 2000│ 25║ 125│ 600║ 25│ 20║
║ 25 mbit/sec ║ 2500│ 26║ 130│ 620║ 27│ 21║
║ 30 mbit/sec ║ 3000│ 27║ 135│ 650║ 30│ 23║
║ 40 mbit/sec ║ 4000│ 28║ 140│ 700║ 40│ 25║
║ 50 mbit/sec ║ 5000│ 30║ 150│ 800║ 50│ 30║
║ 80 mbit/sec ║ 8000│ 35║ 160│ 900║ 80│ 35║
║ 100 mbit/sec ║10000│ 40║ 200│ 1000║ 100│ 40║
╠════════════════╬═════╪═════╬═════╪═════╬════╪═════╣
║CONNECTION TYPE ║ UPLOAD ║ CONNECTIONS ║MAX ACTIVE║
║(UPLOAD MAXIMUM)║Limit│Slots║ Torr│ MAX ║Torr│Down.║
╚════════════════╩═════╧═════╩═════╧═════╩════╧═════╝
Caption
Connection Type/ Upload Maximum = UPLOAD speed in kilobits/sec OR megabits/sec. NOT TO BE CONFUSED WITH DOWNLOAD SPEED MAX! A “10 megabit/sec” cable line has that speed only for download…upload speed is likely 1 megabit/sec OR LESS!
UPLOAD Limit = Max Upload Speed in KiloBYTES/second
Upload Slots = number of peers to upload to at once on EACH active Torrent.
Connections Torr = Maximum Connections allowed PER active Torrent
Connections MAX = Global Maximum Connections allowed
MAX ACTIVE Torr = Total Maximum Active Torrents (This is Downloading PLUS Seeding!)
MAX ACTIVE Down. = Total Maximum Downloading Torrents
<<<<End>>>>
Hope these settings help you.
‘Super’ Seeder’s Stupid Settings
The last µTorrent support post I made was quite popular. over 600 hits in one day (the usual is 20-30/day). However, life goes on and so another day, another stupid support problem, but unlike last time, this guy thinks he’s smart and knows what he’s doing. Like last time, it’s the µTorrenet support channel, and this happened December 16th (yesterday)
Hard to know where to begin really. 2700 torrents, a half-open limit set to 100,000 and ‘no problems’ – Riiiight. I think MC was the only one capable of actually typing during this, the rest of us were too busy laughing.
Quite a few of the old myths came up here. First of all, the half-open connections one. There are only very very rare instances when this has to be modified (with Vista SP2 and Windows7, there isn’t a limit anyway), and in those instances, you don’t need to do more than 50, even on a 100Mbit connection. Second is the myth about having more torrents is better. 2700 torrents uses up a lot of bandwidth just in announces, bandwidth better used elsewhere. It’s maybe 3MB just in tracker announces each time (assuming only one tracker per torrent, multiple trackers, like the 4 on every piratebay torrent multiply that accordingly). Then there is the huge number of total peer connections 2700 torrents would need. Each one of these suchs up more bandwidth (it’s why private tracker users, often running 150-200 active torrents, find public torrents so slow.)
What many people don’t realize is that utorrent itself has a way of handling lots of inactive torrents. In the advanced preferences, there’s an option called queue.dont_count_slow_ul that is set to ‘true’ by default. This option means that inactive torrents (ones with an extremely slow, or zero upload) don’t count towards the queue limits. When your queue limits are reached with active torrents, the rest go back to queued status. That means your bandwidth can be used for active torrents, and not in ‘hoping’ on inactive ones, maximising your upload.
Of course, Delusion can’t really be blamed. I’ve read more than a few torrent guides at various private trackers, and they all give ridiculous settings. After all, it’s not like you need to know what you’re talking about, in order to run one, and that’s another reason why so many fail.
Magnet Links in Operation
This was a segment I originally filmed for TorrentFreak.tv but my voice isn’t exactly the best, and neither is my microphone. However, it’s still important to get it out there
There is a lot of misconceptions about magnet links, and how well they work. A lot of people say they’re slow, which is rubbish. So, I decided to make this little video. For obvious reasons, I used a torrent of TorrentFreak.tv, from mininova.
In the video, I go from taking a magnet link from a website, and loading it into µTorrent (I’m using 2.0 beta for the demonstration, but it works exactly the same with 1.8.x). Just to show you the REAL ’slowness’, I even remove the tracker in the magnet link. It’s is all done without the aid of trackers.
A HD version (it was recorded at a resolution of 1680×1050) can be viewed on youtube
As always, the video is released under a Creative Commons license 
P2P Hurts UK Music Sales…
… or so we’re told.
There is a belief, that music sales are being harmed by the internet. MP3’s and peer-to-peer (p2p) networks have made swapping music easy, ever since Napster burst onto the scene in 1999. There is even a section on the BPI’s website that deals with it (strangely titled “File-sharing FAQ’s“
Why is it a problem; does filesharing damage music sales?
Aside from the fact that filesharing infringes and undermines the rights of the creators and investors in music, it’s enormously damaging to music sales.
Is is true though?
Well, according to figures from the UK music industry themselves, the answer is No.
I have already published this info once, in my recent consultation response submitted to the UK government. What I didn’t do, however, was show what those figures look like. After all an arcane group of numbers might look like anything, what’s needed are some illustrations.
Without further ado, let’s get to the data then.
The data is provided from two sources. The data comes from the Official UK Charts company information pack, And the BPI “Top market lines” publication. Also, as the BPI notes, digital album data was only collected from Q2 2006 onwards, so prior to that, any sales were unrecorded.
Lets’s start with Albums. First, the raw figures (figures are in millions of units)
And likewise the singles figures (again, figures are in millions of units)
This might look like boring data, so lets add the graphs.
Album sales look like this
While singles sales look like this
Doesn’t look all that damaging to sales to me.
One last test though, let’s look at all those sales numbers combined, see just how much the sales have been ‘hurt’ over the last 10 years by P2P.
Anyone want to point me to where the sales are damaged?
A Strange µTorrent Support Question
I’ve been doing support for the µTorrent client, in their IRC channel, for a few years now. I don’t get paid, and I don’t have any official position, but I’ve been doing it a while, and I know my way around things.
Today, I had perhaps one of the most bizzare support questions ever.
[16:48.00] * BB_ (~BonM@P2PNET-D87ED2F2.hsd1.pa.comcast.net) has joined #utorrent
[16:48.30] <BB_> Is something wrong with utorrent. Every time I search I am coming up with no searches.
[16:50.07] <BB_> Can someone help me please?
[16:50.57] <K`Tetch> where are you searching?
[16:51.23] <BB_> mininova
[16:51.48] <K`Tetch> thats why
[16:51.58] <K`Tetch> http://torrentfreak.com/mininova-deletes-all-infringing-torrents-and-goes-legal-091126/
[16:52.20] <K`Tetch> [16:52.07] * Topic is ‘http://www.mininova.org/ | Hosting 1234 torrents [This is part of the topic in the Mininova IRC channel]
[16:53.11] <BB_> what is wrong with the other one?
[16:53.19] <K`Tetch> what other one?
[16:53.46] <BB_> mininova
[16:54.00] <BB_> why isn’t it coming up with anything?
[16:54.03] <K`Tetch> those are both to do with mininiova
[16:54.07] <K`Tetch> read the torrentfreak link
[16:54.58] <BB_> so this means we can’t use utorrent anymore?
[16:55.43] <K`Tetch> what?
[16:56.08] <BB_> I read it.
[16:56.26] <BB_> says that all copyright materials were taken off.
[16:56.47] <K`Tetch> except those uploaded and certified to be uploaded by the rightsholders
[16:56.49] <BB_> so that means there is nothing to download from utorrent then.
[16:57.07] <K`Tetch> utorrent is a client, mininova is a site, they’re not related
[16:57.29] <BB_> so how do you get searches using utorrent then?
[16:57.42] <K`Tetch> it’s like saying ‘google is down, there’s nothing to use with Internet explorer
[16:57.53] <K`Tetch> you never DID use utorrent to search
[16:58.01] <K`Tetch> all it did was pass the search straight onto a website
[16:58.04] <BB_> I know.
[16:58.18] <K`Tetch> theres hundreds of torrent websites
[16:58.23] <K`Tetch> and in fact, google is the biggest
[16:58.36] <BB_> what do I need to do to get a search using utorrent?
[16:58.39] <K`Tetch> but beyond that, I can’t say, because of the ‘no content’ rule
[16:58.47] <K`Tetch> don’t use utorrent to search, most people don’t
[16:59.03] <K`Tetch> just use your browser
[17:00.11] <BB_> ok thanks for the answer.
[17:00.27] <BB_> guess I should remove utorrent then since it’s no longer useful.
[17:01.34] * BB_ (~BonM@P2PNET-D87ED2F2.hsd1.pa.comcast.net) Quit (Quit: I shall return!!!)
Utterly bizarre, and a little worrisome. Despite all the documentation out there – the sites, guides, videos, etc – he still didn’t understand the very basics of how a torrent works. Next time you go to get some support with your client, remember, the guy asking for help before you, may have had this sort of question.
