Slashdot Mirror
LokiTorrent Shut Down
wan-fu writes "LokiTorrent, a popular torrent site, has officially been shut down. After asking for donations from users for the past couple of months to fight the MPAA's lawsuit. LokiTorrent succumbed today and the MPAA took over the website with a stern warning, stating, "You can click, but you can't hide." A variety of outlets are carrying the story."
Didn't this just happen? How in the world did they get a $1 million judgement against LokiTorrent already!?
Is it just me or do the wheels of injustice move far swifter than the wheels of justice?
I'm a big tall mofo.
Regardless of the legality of the site, it is down now simply because they didn't have the money to fight a lawsuit. This is a dangerous trend which has been going on for far too long.
DeviantArt Page
NSFW...by a court order or something, but how can the MPAA take it over and put their own blurb on it short of an actual court decision in their favor?
a) back to the people who donated
b) be channeled to a fund for tsunami victims in Asia
c) get LokiTorrent owner that bitchin new plasma tv at Futureshop
SEO Copywriter. Just Say ON
They always tell you, when you are jumping into the job search fray, to Network, Network, Network. For the flip among us, it is taken to mean that one needs to get greasy and slimy and be generally fake with a bunch of people. These are typically network engineers, which is pretty ironic.
But the same holds true here. You need to be able to get onto networks that are private and trustworthy. The last thing anyone needs is to join a torrent network and have the RIAA or MPAA come in and seize personal hardware. You want to find the torrents that use GUIDs for URIs. You want to find the torrents that are so underground that only the people who are on it know of it. The way to do that is to Network Network Network.
Posting at Slashdot is one good way of Networking. Getting to know people, learning the habits of some posters, and generally being attentive and friendly and discrete is the way to become trustworthy yourself. Once you are seen as someone who can be trusted, you can then approach people about joining their underground torrents.
Hold on, the MPAA can tell me what to do when I'm not even American?
I know what they are trying to do is proper, and cutting the supply off at the central source is tonnes better than the underhanded suing kids and grannies, but I'm not even American.
We need copyright to protect Linux and Open Source in general, but surely only where laws are in place?
side note, can American filesharers use proxies in remote countries to protect themselves from **AA lawsuits?
liqbase
This website has been permanently shut down by court order because it facilitates the illegal downloading of copyrighted motion pictures. The illegal downloading of motion pictures robs thousands of honest, hard-working people of their livelihood, and stifles creativity. Illegally downloading movies from sites such as these without proper authorization violates the law, is theft, and is not anonymous. Stealing movies leaves a trail. The only way not to get caught is to stop.
Am I the only one who is absolutely repulsed by that message? A friend just said, after reading it, "wow... how come I feel that i was just glared at by the SS?". This kind of brainwashing is the same bullshit that got Bush re-elected. Our society requires an informed populace to function properly. All the powers that be are manipulating public perception to suite their own needs and it really, really, needs to stop.
~Lake
But of course they can hide, as MPAA actions force torrent swarms to decentralize and truly anonymize. To the MPAA: you can sue, but you can't catch!
--
make install -not war
They knew copyrighted material was being downloaded illegally, and they were more than happy to help facilitate that -- hell, that was pretty much the raison d'etre of their site.
Athletic Scholarships to universities make as much sense as academic scholarships to sports teams.
That's good for you and all, but I think there's a larger point that needs to be made...
What, really, is the difference between downloading a TV show you missed of LokiTorrent and recording it with your VCR? I've done it a few times, I'm guilty. Did I really hurt anyone? My VCR skips commercials (mostly), so that can't be an argument. It's not like the stuff I'm downloading is even available for me to purchase (or in some cases, to even see again)... but I suppose to the MPAA, I'm still some sort of terrorist.
Yes, he's certainly a jerk for not wanting to be dragged through excessive litigation, bankrupted by lawyer fees, and probably having to pay a settlement anyway. He's a jerk for not wanting to be subject to more gestapo tactics from the MPAA. Yeah, okay.
And I suppose all those people who settle out of court against the RIAA are jerks for paying a few thousand dollars instead of risking a multi-million dollar settlement.
Ordinary people don't have the money to fight these things. It doesn't make them jerks.
You are a troll and need to get some sense of reality.
When you take something from someone else, and they no longer have it, that's stealing.
When you go over to someones house (after they invite you in, of course) examine an object of theirs, and go home and make your own... That's copyright infringement. Assuming, of course, that object was in fact under copyright and not public domain or anything.
Quit buying into their shit.
The "Insert Quote Here" line is almost as predictable as inserting an actual quote.
well, that's a pretty broad definition.
is someone parks in my driveway without giving me five bucks, is that theft? no. it's trespass which is a totally different crime, even though it meets your definition of theft.
they key component of theft is that the owner is denied the use of the property. if someone boosts my car i am denied the use of it. that's theft. if someone violates copyright, the original holders still have property.
bottom line: loss of alleged, potential, future revenue is not theft of a tangible, existing asset. copyright infringement is not theft.
2 1337 4 u!
Does it really help a torrent or ED2k site if you send money to help with legal fees? I would think this would only complicate the defense - having to prove that the money was only used for the benefit of the website.
It looks like the P2P world is going to go through a bit of a shuffle until it can find the "sweet spot" country that will not prosecute, just like what happened with online bookies and casinos.
This story is getting pretty tired. Pirates figure out a smart way to distribute media, old fashioned companies too lazy to change their business model start suing the pants off of everybody, nothing changes in the long run, and in the end the company adopts the new methodologies or dies.
How many times must history repeat itself before companies learn to listen to their consumers? They know what they want better than any marketing department.
Oh yeah, and screw the proprietor of Lokitorrent for being a spineless jellyfish. He did a real disservice to his visitors by ratting them out. There needs to be a P2P code of conduct with a corresponding logo on list sites to tell users that their privacy will be protected if the site comes under legal fire.
This is really troubling. What ever happened to the first amendment? LokiTorrent didn't host any of the illegal contact. How is this different from...?
- Hosting a list of banned books
- A library that contains books on how to pick locks
It seems like the courts often times are fast food restaurants for big corporations. I thought the courts were supposed to be object and ensure the rights of the little guy weren't trampled on??
The real troubling thing is now from new stories the movie mafia wants to "review log files" and go after people who viewed the site. That's rediculous.
Another aspect of this is hiring 3rd party companies to collect evidence. For example all these P2P so called monitoring services. Of course they are going to find evidence in favor of the movie mafia since that is what they are being paid to do. Can you imagine Microsoft doing an objective Linux story and revealing that Linux is in fact better? The government needs to collect the evidence and everything else needs to be thrown out.
It's copyright infringement, not theft for fuck's sake!
Quit trying to make people confuse them. That's like saying amputation is "partial murder".
Am I the only one noticing that the loudest, whiniest people addressing this topic are those that seem to have some personal, vested interest in preserving their ability to avoid paying for their entertainment? Actually, they can have all the free entertainment they want, as long as the entertainer is willing to do it for free. But why bitch about the MPAA? They're powerless without the entertainers that pay them to do what they do. What you're really complaining about are the artists, writers, producers, studios, and other entities that choose to be a part of the MPAA and RIAA universes.
The material that people pirate (presumably because they respect the creators' work enough to want to listen to it or watch it), is created by people who have chosen to use an established entity to help preserve their property rights and get them a paycheck. So, you like the artist, but not the artist's chosen profession or way of making a living?
Consuming an artist's work without paying what they ask for it is just like any other theft of services. Whether or not it's copyright law that has to be used to stop it, how can so many people imply that "because it's not theft" it's somehow OK? Hopping in someone else's cab without paying, just because it's going your way... that's OK? I mean, the cab isn't stolen, so why not? And, that private shuttle bus... it's driving around and around anyway, so why pay for it? Or someone spends their lifetime building botanical gardens, knowing that people will pay to experience them... but they're just sitting there, and all you're doing if you don't pay the gardener's price is using up some photons that no one else was using anyway...
I don't give a damn which law, regulation, or statute specifically addresses this issue, or by which means the artist (and their representatives) tackle the continuing abuse of the material... anyone consuming that work without paying what the artists ask is making slaves of those artists.
That's like saying amputation is "partial murder"
So, not entirely killing someone is OK if only murderers otherwise get punished? And, making only part-time slaves out of people is OK?
Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
i shouldn't really reply to this but
"...C'mon, grow up! It's not a speeding ticket or a parking fine, it's copyright violation."
are you suggesting that file sharing is worse than speeding or parking in dangerous places, both which can be strongly argued as a risk to peoples lives? Compared to these, screwing major corporations out of a few dollars is absolutely meaningless, sort your analogies out. And from what i believe is having a more objective view than most americans of their political system, the government is heavily influenced by the corporations, you can't have a go at people for trying to stand up against them.
"all through my house i set up traps, it seems like the rats have a map, so now i feed the rats crack" - Donald D
Main Entry: theft
Function: noun
Etymology: Old English thiefth
: LARCENY; broadly : a criminal taking of the property or services of another without consent
You have to know what the words of the definitions you use mean too. The filesharers do not "take", they "copy". The main difference being that the original still exists for the use of the person that had it. It's COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT, because you COPIED something that was COPYRIGHTED without having the RIGHT to do it. If I break into a movie studio, take the reels and then leave with them, that is THEFT.
If I shoplift a DVD out of bestbuy, that is also theft, it is no longer there for them to sell. If I rent a DVD from blockbuster, rip it and then take it back, it is a COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT, because blockbuster got their DVD back but I made an unlawful copy, infrining on the copyrights.
Why must some people be so god damn righteous...
The US Supreme Court came to a different conclusion in Dowling vs. United States.
From the decision :
is created by people who have chosen to use an established entity to help preserve their property rights and get them a paycheck.
Chosen is a strong word to use. Are you a musician? Do you know any musicians? Signing with the RIAA or MPAA is not a 'choice' in the way you're probably thinking of it. They have the entire industry by the nuts. They have distribution and radio/television advertising tied up tighter than you can possibly imagine. Their grip on clubs and tours gets tighter every day. Even with the advent of the Internet, there is still no way around them. Anything that challenges them gets sued (whether the complaint is legitimate or not), then gets bought at a bargain basement price, and finally is euthanized or utterly declawed (Select examples: mp3.com, Napster, and now LokiTorrent)
The only 'choice' in signing with the RIAA or MPAA is whether you'd like to make being an artist your full-time job, or whether you'd like to continue it as a hobby while you work at the gas station. For one, you sign with the *AA, for the other you continue being an indy. If you think it isn't really THAT bad, you're wrong. Even rich, successful, well-known artists have tried to go against the tide of the RIAA, and ended up as just so much wreckage shattered on the rocks. The RIAA is a 500 ton gorilla with a massive inferiority complex.
anyone consuming that work without paying what the artists ask is making slaves of those artists.
The RIAA is making slaves out of artists, not the "Pirates". The RIAA was making slaves out of artists long before the first bootleg tape was ever made. Please understand, Pirates (capital P) and the RIAA are at war, and it's not about getting music without paying for it. At its core it mirrors the "free software" movement in many ways. It's about artist's rights and the democratization of the music industry. This doesn't mean I agree with the tactics being used, (by either side) but this whole thing it goes much deeper than mere "stealing music is bad, mmkay?" that's just the surface of the conflict. There are clearly vendettas on both sides. Open source vs. closed source is a cold war/arms race right now, but in contrast the Pirates vs. RIAA is an all-out nuclear war.
And, making only part-time slaves out of people is OK?
Yes, yes it is. Go to any software development company for all your part-time slavery needs. Except EA, they specialize in full-time slavery.
Random and weird software I've written.
I thing a big part of the problem is apathy. No one cares what the government is doing so long as it's not stepping on them.
We invaded a country under the pretenses of self defense against a madman with WMD. A few months later it turns out he didn't have them. Did this hurt the president's reputation in anyway? Only to the people that already hated him. Most people didn't care. In fact, the majority thought he was good enough to relect...
The RIAA and MPAA are suing the hell out of people downloading their material even though they're content with letting people selling bootlegs of their product(which is actually stealing money from them). Do people make a big fuss about this waste of the court system? Only to the people who already have grudges against the MPAA/RIAA. The majority people don't care...
A substanial portion of americans (of all classes) use recreational drugs despite their illegality, especially Marijuana which is less harmful than the legal alternative of cigarettes or alcohol. Yet the people jailed for these crimes are mostly lower class. Furthermore, the "war on drugs" benefits both sides such that neither really would want it to end. The DEA people have nice government jobs and the drug cartels benefit from selling their product at black market prices. The only people that really get hurt are the small dealers or users who don't have the money to defend themselves in court. Do people care that a huge portion of their tax money is spent housing non-violent criminals? The only people who do are the same drug de-criminalization advocates who've been around for a while. The majority of people either don't take part in illegal recreational drugs enough(or at all) to care about this problem because it doesn't step on them.
People being jailed for insane amounts of time for dealing drugs? People getting killed by bombs we bought? People being sued for ludicrous amounts of money for "damages"? The majority of people in this country do not care about anything outside the scope of their own lives.
-Shawn "If the Name Don't Rhyme It Ain't Mine" Conn