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."

60 of 1,332 comments (clear)

  1. Wow - that was fast! by bigtallmofo · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.
    1. Re:Wow - that was fast! by drgonzo59 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Why doesn't he move his website to some other country (except Christmas Island of course, although lokitorrent.cx would be a good url ;) where nobody gives a crap about MPAA? Then he can accept donations to keep the website running and have extra to buy candy and ice-cream instead of paying for legal fees, which is a lot more expensive.

      MPAA is fighting a loosing battle and are wasting their money. If a significat ammount of people don't think trading media is wrong then they'll find a way to do that. It is just like police and society, if everyone decided all of the sudden to go out to kill and pillage, there just won't be enough policemen around to stop them. But most people don't think that killing and pillaging is not right, that keeps the order not the fear or force of the police.

      And I like MPAA's little adds in the movie theatres how they show this poor set designer who claims the pimply-faced hackers stole his money. Why don't they show the billionaire owners and executives of the studios? I can almost see the add:

      [Sad marimba music in the background...]
      "Because of the wide-spread piracy the poor CEO of [insert name] studio won't be able to afford a Ferrari for his 16 year old daughter. Look what piracy has done! His daughter will be forced to drive a BMW now. How does that make you feel?"

    2. Re:Wow - that was fast! by superstick58 · · Score: 5, Funny
      " And I like MPAA's little adds in the movie theatres how they show this poor set designer who claims the pimply-faced hackers stole his money"

      I was in the theater with my friend when we first saw this commercial. During the silence immediately after the commercial my friend burst out "Cool! I should download that when I get home." Everyone started laughing.

    3. Re:Wow - that was fast! by tolan-b · · Score: 5, Informative

      Just btw... Here's a note from Websters on the definition of theft...

      ----

      Note: To constitute theft there must be a taking without the owner's consent, and it must be unlawful or felonious; every part of the property stolen must be removed, however slightly, from its former position; and it must be, at least momentarily, in the complete possession of the thief. See Larceny, and the Note under Robbery.

    4. Re:Wow - that was fast! by drgonzo59 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I like to think there are three broad categories of people that we are talking about here.

      1- People who will never buy the movie or go see it. These people can download all they want (or not) they will simply not pay the money for it.

      2- People that would go buy the movie or go to the theatre unless they found a copy of it they could download, then they will be less likely to pay for it.

      3- People who will go buy and see movies very often regardless if they have access to the downloads or are even offered free copies of them from their friends.

      MPAA has nothing to worry about category 1, since they shouldn't expect any profit from them anyway. I am in that category. Same for software. Sure, I use Photoshop, but I could never afford to pay for it, even if I had the money I wouldn't buy it.

      Some people fall in category 3. My brother, a film enthusiast is in that category. He will go buy the DVD to have it in his collection. This is the category what MPAA also doesn't have to worry about.

      Now category 2 is what they raise all the fuss about. They represent the expected loss from piracy, and I don't think this category is that large compared to the other two categories.

      Of course, this is an oversimplification, but it gives a general idea. Over time individuals will move between categories and change their behavior.

      So I agree it is not theft, but because these studios expect such and such ammount from the movie and if they don't get it they say the pirates came and 'stole' it from them. If a director or producer did a lousy job and movie is a flop - blame the pirates. If people are sick of the same boring stuff and don't want to pay for it - blame the pirates. In other words they are an easy scape-goat. And they will get the law (makers/enforcers) to be on their side since they have all the money.

    5. Re:Wow - that was fast! by Mr_Silver · · Score: 5, Interesting
      No, theft is when you take something away from someone.

      Actually that isn't true.

      The definition of theft is what the laws of your country define, not what US law states.

      In the UK for example, the act of theft does not have to be the removal of a physical object.

      I appreciate the majority of Slashdotters come from the USA and therefore, for them, theft != copyright infringement but don't assume that holds for everywhere in the world.

      ps. Interestingly enough, there is no concept of "fair use" in the UK either - so if you haven't bought your iPod music off iTunes, you're technically breaking the law. Strange, but true!

      --
      Avantslash - View Slashdot cleanly on your mobile phone.
    6. Re:Wow - that was fast! by l4m3z0r · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Great. Now you should realize that what websters says has little bearing on whats enumerated in law. And honestly thats what matters not your definition, not mine and not websters(however websters may be close(r)). The lawful wording of theft is probably signifigantly different, enough so that talking about dictionary definitions because a moot point.

    7. Re:Wow - that was fast! by Lord_Dweomer · · Score: 4, Insightful
      The thing is that while legally, its a black and white issue, however the situation is more complex than that with Photoshop. You see, Adobe owes its popularity to the fact that not only is it incredibly good software, but that it is also the number one most pirated piece of software on the net.

      How does that make them money? Well, they get the REAL dough from corporate licenses, and guess what software all these graphic designers make their companies buy when they need to do work?

      So I have a hard time believing Adobe is doing anything BUT profiting from the pirating.

      --
      Buy Steampunk Clothing Online!
  2. check out lowkee's YAHOO profile by SilveRo_kun · · Score: 5, Informative

    I love his favourite quote... it seems an MPAA statement reguarding lokitorrent's defeat.
    From his profile:
    http://profiles.yahoo.com/edwebber

    Favorite Quote
    "Then there will be running and screaming - Jurassic Park"

    Thank god my ip address is not in the logs that he gave the MPAA.

    I don't think he will answer, but from his profile you can see when he is online, and you can send him a message asking him what's going to happen to that donation you made for the lawsuit. A normal e-mail address is supplied, too.

    P.S, for some reason, sometimes YAHOO says the page doesn't exist... if this is the case, try google's cache =)

    1. Re:check out lowkee's YAHOO profile by XorNand · · Score: 5, Interesting

      They actually took in closer to $70k.

      I long predicted this, for obvious reasons. Loki succeeded in getting a lot of naive idealists rallied around the call to "fight the Man". People donated thinking that they'd have ring-side seats to an exciting legal battle. It was all bullshit... Of course it was. There was absolutely zero change of them successfully defending themselves, based on mountains of preceding case law. If you were sitting on $70k in real cash (not just discussing a hypothetical situation on the semi-anonymous Intraweb), would you really flush it down the toliet? Even if you met with several lawyers who told you to expect the exact same outcome?

      I'm sorry, but this outcome was obvious to any rational observer. It saddened me to see Loki take advantage of their users like that. But, it also enraged me to see them actually monetarily profit from distributing software that was not within their rights to sell.
      --
      Entrepreneur : (noun), French for "unemployed"
    2. Re:check out lowkee's YAHOO profile by XorNand · · Score: 4, Interesting
      One of the last announcements from Mr. Webber. Kinda shameful/funny considering what he's done two weeks later.
      01/27 - LokiTorrent up for sale? (by lowkee)
      I now know what it's like to be a politician. Every move, no matter how small, gets posted as news.

      As some of you may have read recently on some p2p news sites, LokiTorrent.com is posted as 'for sale' on Sedo.com.

      If you ran a website (and some of your do), wouldn't you be curious how much it was worth?

      It's common knowledge that most people that buy websites don't buy them to continue running them. They simply nab the mailing list, spam everyone, then make the site into one big sponsored search engine and pop-up gallery. ...The exact reason selling it would mean scrapping an entire year's worth of work that I and the entire volunteer team at LokiTorrent have put into making a worthwhile community site.

      If some guy offers me $75K for the domain name, he's more than welcome to it, and I'll simply move the site to a different domain. Selling the entire site will never happen. I have way too much of myself in this site to sell it for any price (well, 2 million could get me to part with it, lol.. but let's live in reality).

      As for the legal fund.. if I were going to run off, I would have already. That money is for the lawsuit, as stated. Only those who would run off with the money thought we would.

      The legal fund is an enormous sum, and it shows exactly who supports p2p rights. Those who called it a scam and haven't put a few bucks in don't deserve the work, money and time I and the rest of the supporters of LokiTorrent and other p2p sites have put into their projects. If it were up to them, the internet would be nothing more than porn spam and fake college degrees.

      Lead by example. We're fighting for your rights, the right to run our site and up until recently I have been spending my OWN money (thousands of it!) to keep LokiTorrent running for this past year. It was only recently when we began making our bills.. just in time for them to double from extra bandwidth usage.

      If there were so many who jump on the 'it's a scam' bandwagon every time we make a change or entertain curiousity, this website (and many other user supported sites) would never exist. I can't tell you how many people I've seen say 'That lawsuit is a fake, anyone can make up a bogus suit'

      Yeah, tell that to the MPAA. I'd love nothing more than to make that rediculous suit vanish.

      Write an article on that.

      Lowkee
      LokiTorrent.com
      --
      Entrepreneur : (noun), French for "unemployed"
  3. What I want to know... by Vann_v2 · · Score: 5, Funny

    What I want to know is, if I were to work for the MPAA, would I get a cute proto-fascist uniform? You know, maybe black or a rich tan color, with a little armband and small hat. Because if I did then I'd definitely work for them.

  4. Death by Litigation by slusich · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

    1. Re:Death by Litigation by WhatAmIDoingHere · · Score: 5, Interesting

      They had raides $45,000, which the site owner said should be enough for almost two months legal defence. As it turns out, he gave the MPAA the site, the server logs and $5-10k and walked away with a PROFIT.

      --
      Not a Twitter sockpuppet... but I wish I was.
  5. I can see the site being shut down by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ...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?

    1. Re:I can see the site being shut down by Zocalo · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Well several of the sites are claiming it was a "settlement" between the MPAA and Lowkee/Ed Webber. The general consensus seems to be that this entails handing over of the site, any logs and an unspecified amount of money to the MPAA and a promise not to do it again, or face further more severe sanctions. A jail sentence, or even a criminal prosecution, does not appear to be in the offing, although there *is* a court gagging order in effect. However, for a different take on what "settlement" might have been, check out this article, which should be especially of interest to the suck^H^H^H^H people who donated money.

      --
      UNIX? They're not even circumcised! Savages!
  6. "The only way not to get caught is to stop" by jolyonr · · Score: 4, Interesting

    - quote from their site.

    So does that mean if you have downloaded stuff, and you stop, they can't catch you? Does it imply an amnesty? Or is it just sloppy wording on their part?

    Jolyon

    --


    Please read my Canon EOS tech blog at http://www.everyothershot.com
  7. Scary Message by bblazer · · Score: 4, Funny

    I just checked out the hijacked site and saw their warning. It claims that downloading copyrighted files leaves a trail and the only way not to get caught is to stop. I wonder if this is the same trail that led them to the 80 year old woman that didn't own a computer that they sued (repealing the suit only after she died). I heard as she died she exclaimed, "Run, run as fast as you can (MPAA) you can't catch me I am the gingerbread man!!!!"

    --
    My .bashrc can beat up your .bashrc!
  8. And the donated money will go... by rinkjustice · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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

    1. Re:And the donated money will go... by bmongar · · Score: 4, Insightful

      d) be used to pay the settlement with the MPAA

      --
      As x approaches total apathy I couldn't care less.
  9. TheInquirer article by hoferbr · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Something to worry about:

    What's really alarming the swapperati, though, is that Lokitorrent has agreed to turn over the server's user logs.

    In a normal situation, you could make the case that agreeing to turn those over is a violation of users' privacy. In this situation, even if you could show that the site's terms and conditions promised never to disclose its users' information, you would almost certainly lose: a court that has just shut down a site for illegal activity is hardly likely to agree to protect its users. Especially not since the Supreme Court decision in Illinois v. Cabbales, which held that sending a sniffer dog to find drugs through a car stopped for speeding does not violate the Fourth Amendment (the one that prohibits search and seizure without probable cause). Around now, the MPAA is probably gleefully poring over the logs, going through IP numbers, and compiling a list of the "hundreds of thousands" of individuals it might sue next. Fun!


    From http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=21216

  10. Oh that explains.. by StacyWebb · · Score: 5, Funny
    "The illegal downloading of motion pictures robs thousands of honest, hard-working people of their livelihood, and stifles creativity"
    Well I guess that expains all the crappy movies coming out of Hollywood.
  11. This is why you need to "network" by Dancin_Santa · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

    1. Re:This is why you need to "network" by Swamii · · Score: 5, Funny

      Dear Kind Mr. Dancinsanta Sir

      My name is Julian Gilby Mulahmulah, son of the late King Abwar Mulahmulah III of Ivory Coast.

      As it happens, my country's underground torrent has been taken over by evil Movie Picture Association Rebels and have taken hostage my father, the former king, and other members of the royal palace. Praise be to Allah, before the takeover I was able to smuggle out the kings royal coffers, totalling in the amount $10,000,000 (ten million United States Dollars).

      Sadly and with a broken heart, I cannot deposit this money in a local bank account, as every move made in the country is done under the watchful scrutiny of the MPAA rebels. I humbly and most abashadly ask that you help me in this matter. If you could provide me with the name and universal resource indicator of your underground torrent, I will gladly offer you 5% of the royal king's coffers in exchange for your assistance in this most urgent matter.

      I most humbly and anxiously await your speedy reply.

      Kindly,
      Julian Gilby Mulahmulah

      --
      Tech, life, family, faith: Give me a visit
  12. Not american. by LiquidCoooled · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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 :: faster than paper
  13. Repulsive... by LakeSolon · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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

    1. Re:Repulsive... by Joey7F · · Score: 4, Insightful
      A friend just said, after reading it, "wow... how come I feel that i was just glared at by the SS?"


      I am guessing your friend feels like that because he is an idiot. No I am serious, this is not flamebait, why not see what the SS did

      The MPAA is full of retards, but the SS were truly sadistic, evil men and as such comparisons should be used with great deliberance... not as an off the cuff remark.

      --Joey

  14. Trite but trite by L.+VeGas · · Score: 5, Funny

    "You can click, but you can't hide"?

    This is a wonderful illustration of the creative genius of the entertainment industry. I have a few more suggestions along the same lines.

    "Guys don't make passes at girls who click torrents."

    "You can lead a horse to water, but you better not click that torrent!"

    "Click on a torrent, break your mama's back."

    "What would Jesus Do? Not click on torrents, you betcha!"

    "I wouldn't click on a torrent if it were the last torrent on earth."

  15. Comin' a rain... by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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

  16. Before we over react by gowen · · Score: 4, Insightful
    This website has been permanently shut down by court order because it facilitates the illegal downloading of copyrighted motion pictures.
    Let's face it. Every single word of that is true. Loki didn't quit because they ran out of money, they quit because they were going to lose, and they knew it.

    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.
  17. Re:Whew... by ElGuapoGolf · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

  18. Parent is flamebait and trollish. Mod down. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.

    1. Re:Parent is flamebait and trollish. Mod down. by DenDave · · Score: 4, Interesting
      I really would like to know how torrents break the law.

      "guns don't kill, people do..."
      You suggest the site's maintainer didn't mean to provide access to illegal content? C'mon, grow up.. 99% of his traffic was what?
      If your logic is sound then why aren't all torrent hosting sites taken down? agha... because they don't all allow torrents of copyright protected content.. they maintain their sites and assure that the legal torrents get a spot..
      --
      -if at first you don't succeed, stay the heck away from paragliding.
    2. Re:Parent is flamebait and trollish. Mod down. by jargoone · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Good god, when will people stop with the fucking riduculous analogies. If you give a DVD to a friend, you don't have it anymore. And obviously, this has nothing to do with multiple people, in the same physical location, watching the same copy. This is about making perfect, or pretty damn good, copies, and distributing them very easily in mass quantities.

      I'm not saying I'm completely against downloading stuff from torrent sites -- I do it sometimes, too. But it is trademark infringement, and it is currently against the law. Just stop with the stupid comments, okay? They only make "us" look worse.

    3. Re:Parent is flamebait and trollish. Mod down. by LakeSolon · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The popularity of sites like Lokitorrent are an expression of the will of the people. The fact that something illegal (but not clearly immoral) is so popular is a demonstration of how disconnected our political/legislative system is from the will of the people.

      ~Lake

    4. Re:Parent is flamebait and trollish. Mod down. by Jane_Dozey · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Yes, it was distributing copyrighted content without the permission of the copyright holders, but it was also useful for finding perfectly legel content. I'm sorry to see it go, I'm just not sorry to see copyrighted content taken down.

      "I'm not sorry to see this site go, we need to concentrate more on having LEGAL torrent sites."

      The MPAA needs to concentrate on setting these up themselves. People want the content and will most probably pay (a reduced) fee to download it. If the MPAA set up an iTunes type service they'd probably make a lot of money without p***ing everybody off. Their current behaviour makes me want to go download a mass of stuff just to spite them.

      --
      Silly rabbit
    5. Re:Parent is flamebait and trollish. Mod down. by ceeam · · Score: 4, Interesting

      From what you said: "I told him he should take it down. He did not. I removed his hardware. Problem solved.".

      From your sig: "Hacking your Xbox? Start here".

      Do you realize that what you advertise in your sig is massively illegal and when collided with your message it produces a vast amount of irony? Be careful ;)

  19. You're wrong. by ShallowThroat · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.
    1. Re:You're wrong. by arkanes · · Score: 5, Insightful
      If you buy a Coke instead of a Pepsi, you just deprived Pepsi of a sale. That doesn't make it theft. Loss of a sale, for whatever reason, isn't theft. That's aside from the usual (often self-serving) arguments that very few sales are actually lost to P2P (although I'm certain the number is greater than zero).

      Many people do use theft in this way, ie "That store down the street is stealing my customers". It's a common, emotional way of reacting when you feel like you're owed something. It's also wrong, because nobody owes you anything, least of all thier money or patronage.

    2. Re:You're wrong. by Reziac · · Score: 4, Interesting

      ***
      Many people do use theft in this way, ie "That store down the street is stealing my customers". It's a common, emotional way of reacting when you feel like you're owed something. It's also wrong, because nobody owes you anything, least of all thier money or patronage.
      ***

      Some Los Angeles area courts disagree. Two businesses that I used to patronize were both hauled into court by their competitors, and forced to stop doing business with the public.

      One was an individual who would sometimes provide medical services to homeless people for little or no money; his competitors took him to court for "not charging the going rate" and "depriving competitors of a chance to earn a living" (yes, the suit was worded something like that -- I saw the actual legal documents), and the upshot was that his license was suspended by the court. Right, like homeless people are going to pay anything regardless??

      The other was a large vertical manufacturer who both made and sold their own raw materials and finished products, hence could sell either at a much lower price than any of the competing businesses -- who in fact usually bought their raw and finished inventory FROM this manufacturer (one of many in their field, tho they are the largest in this immediate area). Naturally word got around, and pretty soon everyone bought from the source instead of paying the small retailers' markup. So the retailers got together and dragged this manufacturer into court under some sort of "restraint of trade" charge -- and WON. This manufacturer can no longer sell to the public, by court order, SOLELY so their competitors can make money. (BTW this is why a few years ago, the local price of chainlink fence and chainlink prefabs abruptly tripled.)

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
  20. Re:QUIT LYING! by Frymaster · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Copyright infringement is a form of theft since the rightful owners of the copyrighted material aren't being compensated.

    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.

  21. legal wheel keeps on turning by spyrochaete · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.

  22. Only in the USA by lipi · · Score: 5, Informative

    From the site:"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."

    I'm tired reading this sort of stuff again and again. They always forget to mention that it is illegal only in the USA. For example it is perfectly legal to download music or video for personal use in the EU, even with file sharing application where you make it avaliable for 3rd party temporarily. I found even those living in the EU are not aware of this situation, probably due to the continuous MPAA/RIAA threathenings.

    Distributing copyrighted content is a different issue even in the EU, but I'm not familiar with the legal side of that. All I know my movie downloads fall in the "fair use" category according to the current EU copyright law.

    1. Re:Only in the USA by doctomoe · · Score: 5, Informative
      This is not entirely true.

      It is true that there are several exceptions to copyright in EU laws, the most important ones being "private copy" and "private use".

      The "private copy" exception only applies if the source of the copy is legal. Making a copy of a bought or borrowed DVD is legal. Making a copy of a copy is illegal if one never had access to the original, unless the original was not protected by copyright or had a licence attached to it that allows for copies to be made. Files distributed on p2p networks are always copies of an original and never an original per se.

      The "private use" exception allows me to use a copyrighted content at home or within my family. I can show a DVD I bought to my family or a group of my friends. However I can't invite a group of 50 random people from the street to watch it with me. In the same way, I can't invite 50 people on the net (p2p) to watch it with me.

      In short, both exceptions fail in the case of p2p networks. There are others, but they don't apply to p2p networks either (for instance copying items for educational purposes).

  23. Library analogy by IgD · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

  24. How long does SBC keep server logs? by Cryofan · · Score: 4, Funny

    Just askin', that's all.....

    --
    eat shiat and bark at the moon
  25. That funny smell round LokiTorrent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative


    On several BitTorrent and P2P forums we have noticed reports that LokiTorrent actually has been holding out hoping that the MPAA will make an offer to shut them down rather then wage on with the expensive pending lawsuit. We have decided to research this rumor ourselves to see what this popular torrent site is up to. Original this was posted on p2pforum but has vanished... We are posting this story for the public awareness.

    Some things we have noticed about the popular bit torrent site Lokitorrent that have raised some red flags is that they started collecting a US$30,000 legal fund to defend their site before they even were being sued! Even more odd was once they were sued they raised this amount to US$30,000 per month in legal fees plus US$4000 per month in site costs. To us this all sounds kind of fishy. Our question is why?

    After several failed attempts to reach Lokitorrent site admins looking for answers we went and contacted the MPAA which was more than happy to state that yes Lokitorrent and the MPAA were in negotiations and that the current offer could not be disclosed nor could the terms if the deal were to be reached.

    We all know bit torrent site admins take pride in their grassroots, non-profit image however most sites make huge amounts of money. Suprnova which claims to have shutdown due to MPAA pressure and to finish working on their Exeem project for their client is completely just lies. Suprnova was making alot of money. Figure if they had 2,000,000 visitors per day (which is what lokitorrent claims to have, suprnova many estimate had closer to 5,000,000) they would have made close to US$90,000 per month just from per-click ads. Do the math, (all you blog site admins will be kicking yourself because you know this is true) if even only 1.5% (my blog site even gets about 6%, so 1.5% is really low estimate) click an ad, even if by mistake they get an average of $.10 per click so they would be making US$3000 per day times 30 days, not to mention those annoying high paying popups. So now you are asking why would Suprnova shutdown if they were making so much? Well the answer is simple, with Exeem they have much lower costs as their whole system can run on 2 or 3 servers and their effort to maintain those 2 or 3 servers is alot lower as well when you consider they had more then 25 servers going at their peak. Exeem also will make them a ton of money through Cydoor. Some estimate they can easily make $1 per user per day which would put them at close to US$300,000 per day with their current user base. Cydoor is a information harvesting company. They harvest the users info to either sell to marketing companies and spammers or to use your info to hit you with ads directly for their clients. By using Exeem these companies know everything about you just by monitoring your online actions. You go to your email, they now know your email address, you fill in a form they have your name and home address, the information they can harvest is limitless and it is totally legal because when you install Exeem the user license informs you of this if you were to actually read it. If you dont believe us click here and read the part about Cydoor carefully.

    So why do Lokitorrent and Suprnova care so much about the public knowing about all this? They care because if you knew about it their image as being modern day Robinhoods would be tarnished and they would not be able to sucker you their user into donating Thousands of dollars to them.
    Our prediction is this Lokitorrent will sign a deal with the MPAA to shutdown, they will claim to shutdown saying that do to lack of donations they ca not afford to fight the case. The Lokitorrent admins save face with the BitTorrent community and continue their mufftorrent porn site and everyone goes on thinking they were just underdogs that could not afford to fight.
    We would actually like to hear a reply from lokitorrent or suprnova on this actually and we welcome their reply. Again this is all just still brain food and speculation at this point.

    [BitTorrent News, 30 jan]

  26. Re:Minor correction to the story: by WhatAmIDoingHere · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Definitions of theft on the Web:

    larceny: the act of taking something from someone unlawfully

    If I download a movie what have I taken? Profit? They never would have gotten it in the first place. I don't go out to movies, but I buy them on DVD if they're good (as judged by the file I downloaded)

    So if I purchase their product on DVD (Where most of their profit is actually made) who am I forcing to sell their child into slavery? The stars who make $xxMillion per movie? The crew who was paid before the movie was released to theaters? Or the already rich management bastards at the movie company?

    --
    Not a Twitter sockpuppet... but I wish I was.
  27. Catch as catch can by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Where are these BitTorrent servers located? The Internet is "virtual", but the MPAA raids are physical, in one country or another. Loki, SuprNova, others - in which countries are the MPAA moviecops raiding offices? MPAA claims to operate police in at least "Austria, Hong Kong, Finland, France and the Netherlands as movie industry cops". Which countries now retain their jurisdiction sovereignty, and which are now just muscle for the US adfotainment hegemony?

    --

    --
    make install -not war

  28. Re:Minor correction to the story: by Znork · · Score: 5, Informative

    "Copyright infringement is a type of theft."

    No, it isnt. It is a violation of government granted temporary exclusive rights. You're not taking any property, you're violating their exclusive right to make copies.

    If copyright was 'actual property', then the expiration of copyright would mean the state was confiscating that property. Not even the RIAA/MPAA's propaganda machines tries to claim that yet. I'll bet you it's coming tho, and that it's the reason they want to anchor the belief that physical and intellectual property are in any way similar - wait for the campaign where they'll try to convince us that the state is trying to steal their property, and that copyright and patents should be extended to forever.

    Beware what ideas the propaganda machines try to place in your head, for their agenda is not always what they claim it to be.

  29. Anonymous P2P by Sheepdot · · Score: 4, Informative

    The day has come for Anonymous P2P.

    Why not use technologies like Tor (funded by the US government for FBI and CIA intelligence gathering anonymously), ANTS, Entropy, and Mnet?

  30. Re:QUIT LYING! by ScentCone · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.
  31. Parent is flamebait and trollish. Mod down by pluke · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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
    1. Re:Parent is flamebait and trollish. Mod down by Warped1 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I was reading this book (Stiff by Mary Roach) and it mentioned how airline companies determined if they should deploy certain saftey devices on airplanes. The formula was like the one rattled off in Fight Club, based on the cost of the settlement payouts for those who died or were injured.

      I think it was something like 2 or 4 million USD a human life was worth in a settlement. And the number shown on the FBI warning screen says something like $250k for violating the copyright. So basically, in monetary value, a human life lost due to neglegence or whatever is worth about 8 to 16 video pirating charges. Kind of sad.

      This is all based on my memory of the book quote of the settlement price, so I may ... will ... be off a bit, but the concept holds I think. I googled a bit to try and find the numbers, but didn't net anything. If someone wants to correct the numbers, feel free. ;)

  32. Stifles creativity? by Spy+der+Mann · · Score: 5, Funny

    From TFW:
    "The illegal downloading of motion pictures robs thousands of honest, hard-working people of their livelihood, and stifles creativity."

    Oh boy. I can't wait 'til the MPAA go after the patent offices!

  33. Re:QUIT LYING! by EulerX07 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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...

  34. Re:Minor correction to the story: by poot_rootbeer · · Score: 5, Funny

    LokiTorrent, a popular torrent bootlegger site

    I'm a torrent bootlegger.

    I download .torrent files from popular trackers, make copies of them, and then post those .torrent copies on Usenet!

  35. Re:Minor correction to the story: by Bloomy · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Copyright infringement is a type of theft.

    The US Supreme Court came to a different conclusion in Dowling vs. United States.

    From the decision :

    Since the statutorily defined property rights of a copyright holder have a character distinct from the possessory interest of the owner of simple "goods, wares, [or] merchandise," interference with copyright does not easily equate with theft, conversion, or fraud. The infringer of a copyright does not assume physical control over the copyright nor wholly deprive its owner of its use. Infringement implicates a more complex set of property interests than does run-of-the-mill theft, conversion, or fraud.
  36. Re:QUIT LYING! by Cecil · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.

  37. The Problem: Apathy by Mitaphane · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.