I would see a communication to the public as one that is single source and indiscriminately communicated. ie: a sign is a public communication, or your guy on a soap box, or a TV program. A communication based on contacting an individual listed in a directory is not a public communication. ie: you look up someone's phone number and call them, the call isn't a communication to the public even if the directory is. A swarm is just a form of directory.

Bumfuckistan's of the world are easily bought/corrupted/bullied into shutting down such sites. It's happened dozens of times already. It's also less of a grey area because streaming is a broadcast not a communication between peers. They may not bust individuals for watching but they'll have no trouble shutting down those sites.

The problem is one of access and choice. Steam is great but there's no guarantee of access to specific content through the service of your choice. There's also no equivalent competition for Steam on PC so their policies rule the day. If you disagree you lose your content. I've lost content even while agreeing (I bought games with specific functionality which was later patched out making the game pointless for my purposes to which Steam effectively replied "so sue us").

They aren't popping up though, especially not ones of any quality. The law is catching up but as usual it's being used as a club and with a complete misunderstanding of what technology is doing. Take the Voltage case in Canada - the legislation and interpretation by the courts to this point is that P2P constitutes a public communication. This ignores the fact that peer to peer by it's very name is a communication between peers, it ignores that it takes place entirely on private networks (there is no "public internet"), it ignores the hearsay nature of swarms, privacy of communications, etc. Until reasonable, predictable law is in place that protects all parties there will be fewer people willing to take the legal risk of starting a torrent site, let alone having the technical expertise. imo there's more need now for TPB than ever.

Unfortunately it's going to cost serious money, effort, and time to regain the civil rights we've lost under these insane treaties like WIPO, Berne, Rome Convention, and soon to be TPP. There are just too many areas where the law has been corrupted in favour of corporate/government rights over civil rights. Heck, in my province the default "civil rights" are those from 1792 England - I'm not even sure anyone knows what those were anymore.

In my experience - the backup gets checked every single time. I guess the standards at a small law firm are better than at a major corporation.

For what reason does accounting need access to video production or vice versa? They are, or ought to be, separate internal systems that do not interact. Unless you're suggesting multiple intrusion points

And a competent IT team wouldn't notice major settings changes or the change in backup size?

And our ability to secure information & monitor data flow on networks remained stagnant in that time?

Raw footage is massive, that's understandable - but what is raw footage and accounting doing on the same system? I can't answer that either way... time will tell the story.

You do unencrypted backups?

It would cost ~$3,500 retail for 100TB - easily accomplished by 1 individual.

The big question is, how did they not notice that much data going out regardless of time frame.

If you want to frame it that way, the less people donate the less the executive should be paid. The full compensation package for Yahoo!'s executive director, including stock, was $23.4mil/year for 5 years - or $0.0052% of revenue

Again, it depends on how you look at it. Salary can range from $1 (Google) to $23.4 million (Yahoo).

Looking at it in that manner is also highly misleading. Yahoo as an example has revenue of $4.5 billion and 12k+ employees. Wiki has revenue of $48 million and only 208 employees.

Depends on what you mean by size, but I'm not sure what the US data is for that exact question. Overall nationally the total pay is $39,567 - $151,304. Median of $96,056 for San Francisco. 90% of executive director pay in San Francisco is below $150,000.

Government incentive plan paid above market rates to encourage development. We got in at the highest incentive rate - payback is on track for 7 years without the trackers - we figured 10-12 years with them which was too long. It sounds like it would have cost a lot more in the long run.

I know of a major project that is doing quite well along the same lines, again no trackers. (Featured on Dragon's Den around the 10:30 mark - http://www.cbc.ca/dragonsden/e... )