Feds Shut Down Elite Torrents

honkimon writes "Cnn Money reports, "Government agents said the onslaught included 10 search warrants and the shut down of a central Web site used to coordinate all file-sharing activity on the Elite Torrents network. That Web site, Elitetorrents.org, had a selection of copyrighted works that government officials described as virtually unlimited.""

Comments

Re:Department of Homeland Security was involved?

[incom]

You joke, but most people don't even blink about this misuse of terrorist fighting powers. I swear lobotomies are being covertly administered VERY frequently or something.

Hydra

[1967mustangman]

Bittorrnt is a hydra-headed deal. THey will never be able to lop off enough heads to make a difference. Torrenters will just adapt.

Re:Hydra

[gosand]

Torrenters dealing in illegal wares should be shut down. If more and more sites use it for legitimate uses, then Bittorrent will survive. If it is only used for illegal stuff, then there are better chances that it will be attacked.

So they shut down a site that was trading in illegal stuff. What is the big deal? (other than the fact that the feds are concerned with THIS and not so much things that really hurt human beings)

Re:Hydra

[mr. methane]

Theoretically true of any criminal act, but by making an example of the ones you *do* happen to catch, you discourage others from doing the same thing.

Wonder how many people are going to be getting a little certified letter in the mail about 90-120 days from now.

Re:Hydra

[Fittysix]

There's no way to attack bittorrent as a whole, it's akin to attacking HTTP, FTP or any other application layer protocal.

Re:Hydra

[maxpublic]

So they shut down a site that was trading in illegal stuff. What is the big deal? (other than the fact that the feds are concerned with THIS and not so much things that really hurt human beings)

Torrents wouldn't be so bloody popular unless the current distribution model for media was a source of widespread dissatisfaction. Despite a plethora of laws passed to uphold aging business models, the number of Americans (just Americans) engaging in illegal downloading activity passed more than an estimated *70 million* last month. When a quarter of your citizens consistently and repeatedly break the law despite the imposition of relatively harsh (even ludicrous) prison sentences then there's something seriously wrong with the law - by definition. The citizens supposedly define the law, and if a good chunk of them ignore it (with the numbers rising every month) it's a fair bet that the law they're dismissing doesn't reflect their own interests or goals.

The RIAA and MPAA refuse to adapt to changing market conditions. Just plain, flat-out refuse. Probably because they know that in this case while adaption might very well preserve or even increase profits, it'll almost certainly strip them of the non-economic power they've acquired over the last fifty years - power that the tin-pots in the industries love more than money itself. So instead of adapting and avoiding this whole mess they buy laws and send Americans to jail over COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT, which is just fucking stupid.

And yet despite this, the increasingly stiffer penalties, and the crackdowns, the number of Joes and Janes breaking these laws is climbing faster than at any other time in history since the Prohibition! That should tell you something right there about how well the law reflects the will of the people it supposedly serves.

Max

And this ended piracy for all time...

[Pacifix]

... The RIAA and MPAA heads can sleep easy tonight on their piles of money with their many beautiful women. Seriously, spend money on fixing the outdated media distribution channels and piracy will stop being worth it.

Title of the post should have been:

[pjammer]

OMFG! 5-0 PNWS L33T T0RRNTZ! LOL!!!

Perhaps they should have been using an artifical intelligence content-authoring program?

It seems unreal...

[jZnat]

Why the FUCK would the FBI (who's purpose is to prevent communism) even get involved in copyright infringement? This seems to be in the **AAs' field to send cease and desist letters, or even the FTC to step in and bitch at ET, but not the FBI...

Re:It seems unreal...

[TANK Ex Mortis]

You might have had a valid point if you hadn't compared copyright violations to genocide.

Most people don't know any better...

[Marnhinn]

True - to most people this isn't a misuse of terrorist fighting powers, but then again most people don't know what a torrent even is.

Average Joe American, is not savvy / educated enough to understand the mechanics of torrents, Hollywood (for instance that - Star Wars was an insider leak) or that this is a misuse of the DoH's resources. To them, pirates, downloaders and terrorists are one and the same.

Why? Because somewhere along the last couple of decades, peoples' knowledge of their own laws, (especially laws involving quickly changing technology) took a significant downturn. Simply try asking people on the street about the USAPatriot Act or the DMCA. Most - know nothing. Some may have a different perception of the act due to propaganda and only a few will care about it.

Unless it is directly affecting the person, it's not important to them for the most part...

Democracies, in order to be effective, require active and INFORMED citizens - something that is slowly dissappearing (for a multitude of reasons).

Re:Most people don't know any better...

[Orgazmus]

Democracies, in order to be effective, require active and INFORMED citizens - something that is slowly dissappearing (for a multitude of reasons).

Maybe the old impulse cannon you target at your heads all day long has something to do with this?
Fair and balanced, my ass!

Dear Americans:
Stop letting TV control your view, and check things out for yourselves. It might be interesting to see what is going on outside of the living room.

Re:Most people don't know any better...

[PseudononymousCoward]

that patriot act of yours is darn scary. does anyone know if there is an equivilant in Britain?

Are you kidding me? You guys don't even have a Constitution to provide an foundation to object to laws like PATRIOT. Have you ever checked out the UK's anti-terror laws? Check out the "Anti- Terrorism, Crime and Security Act of 2001" (which, BTW I'm unclear whether its anti terrorism, crime, and security, or only anti terrorism and crime; I would presume that it is pro-security, though the title is a bit ambiguous on that point.) Its chock full of fun bits.

Better yet, check out the laws in the UK in the 1970's and 80's to deal with the IRA--I'm not defending any group or act here, just pointing out that many of those laws make PATRIOT look benign. Just a hint: indefinite detention without any trial, and there's more where that came from.

Far from what the rhetoric of /. would lead one to believe, the civil liberties in the US are quite extensive, and quite well-protected. It is only because they are so extensive, that we notice when they are diminished.

Re:Most people don't know any better...

[Anonymous Coward]

Democracies, in order to be effective, require active and INFORMED citizens - something that is slowly dissappearing (for a multitude of reasons).

it seems like a conflict of interest to have a government that relies on an educated populated to also be responsible for the education of that very same population.

Re:Most people don't know any better...

[maxpublic]

Dear Americans:

This should read 'dear humans', but I guess some europeans can't admit that their folks are just as fucking ignorant as our own.

Max

Re:Most people don't know any better...

[ScentCone]

I like to think that in the modern age, people are protected by bodies like the UN. It pisses me off when the governing bodies of countries like America ignore UN rules because they think they are above the international law. In a perfect world, no one would have such extreme power over anyone else...

Are you even listening to yourself? To translate: no one should have power over anyone else... except for the UN, which is made up of people, who would then have power over other people?

That would be the UN, which has done such a fabuluous job of protecting people in Africa? Or in preventing Iran for forging ahead with nukes? Or in helping the poor bastards living in North Korea? Or in stopping China from threatening Taiwan? Or which kept the Baltics all nice and tidy when the Serbs and the Croats blew up? Or the UN that did such a great job of making Saddam even richer as they put together a totally corrupt oil-for-food program? Ask the people living in Darfur how protected they're feeling.

The Cost of Idiocy

[CristalShandaLear]

Movie Tickets in my area $9.50
Amount of downloads: Aprox 10,000
Amount Star Wars grossed in just the first weekend: $158.5 million

I suppose that somehow, somewhere that extra $95,000 that they may or may not have made anyway is worth all this.

I'd bet that 9K out of the 10K downloaders actually paid to see the movie anyway.

Re:Department of Homeland Security was involved?

[iminplaya]

I swear lobotomies are being covertly administered VERY frequently or something.

It's not even covert. Most people are lobotomized within 10 seconds of turning on the TV. The job won't be finished until the same thing is done with the internet. This is a tiny peek into the new world order that 99% of you voted for.

FBI Shot itslef?

[Chrish2]

Have any of you noticed the image thay have used a the top of the page? Now, im sure that is a copyrighted image. Remember FBI agents "It is unlawful to reproduce or distribute copyrighted material, such as images, without authorization - even when done for free over the Internet. Individuals who willfully distribute or download copyrighted material risk criminal prosecution under 18 U.S.C. 2319. First-time offenders convicted of criminal felony copyright laws will face up to five years in federal prison, restitution, forfeiture and a fine." Now also according to this i have comited a crime by viewing the page on the net that has a copyrighted image on that page SUE THE FBI - SUE THE FBI (lol)

Ripoff?

[jfengel]

I know you're just making a joke, but I'm curious: in what way was Revenge of the Sith ripping people off? They made a movie, and they were hoping to sell tickets to it, and eventually sell DVDs. Are you saying that the price for a ticket is too high?

George Lucas sure will make a profit off that, but is all profit-making a ripoff?

Re:Ripoff?

[Dr. Evil]

Mass produced media has all but killed small theatres and live entertainment. Even the local jobs from Cinemas are near-minimum wage mcjobs, and even those are being replaced by machines. The Cinema operations are franchised so as to lock in who can operate the enterprise and how they operate it, and the distribution of film quality is even monitored to keep cinemas on their toes.

It's a vertical monopoly where studios own the cinemas and the distribution. Worse, the studios and cinemas collude to ensure minimum competition and maximum revenue from their films.

Blockbuster cinema houses starve out independent cinema houses, then for the mostpart refuse to air local content which might not fill the seats. It's a rape of our culture and funnels money out of the local economy and right into Hollywood.

The revenues are used to empower legal teams to change copyright legislation so as to artificially protect their intellectual property. The rights which copyright gave them to make their bililons of dollars is just not enough for them.

In a world of six billion people, we should see more films and creative content than ever in the history of the earth, but for some reason, all we care about is the production of a few films from these big corporations.

In other words, George Lucas is a role model for Americans to screw the little guy.

Re:Ripoff?

[KingSkippus]

...in what way was Revenge of the Sith ripping people off?

I actually liked Revenge of the Sith, so I let others argue over whether the ticket price was a ripoff to see that particular movie. :-)

However, I don't need to argue about that. I can think of a few other ways we're being ripped off pretty quickly:

• The studios diligently working to illegally take away my fair use rights of the movie.
• The studios screwing movie theaters by making unreasonable monetary demands of the theaters that show their movies during the opening weeks. (Thus forcing theaters to pass the cost on to us by making us finance popcorn if we actually want a snack.)
• The studios undermining my Constitutional freedom to copy the movie after a limited time.
• Imposing excessive fines and punishment on a minor crime when copyright violators are caught. (I can't dig up the link offhand that I saw comparing the punishment for downloading a movie vs. stealing it from a store. Can anyone else help?)
• The corporate executives at the studios screwing the vast majority of the people who worked on the film to keep most of the profit in the hands of a very small minority of people who did nothing to contribute to the film. (A big problem in big corporations, not limited to the film industry.)
• The studios working together to keep the prices of DVDs artificially high.

That's just off the top of my head. Anyone else care to add to the list?

So no, not all profit-making is a ripoff. But that doesn't change the fact that some of it certainly is. And no, illegally downloading and/or sharing movies isn't legal or ethical. But in the grand scheme of things, I think it's a hell of a lot less serious an offense than what the movie studios and especially the **AA are doing.

Re:Ripoff?

[Surt]

It's a ripoff when the advertising misleads you into paying to see a movie that turns out to be nothing like the clips, and in some cases not even to contain the clips. When you're dissatisfied with the product, there is usually no recourse, you can't get any of your money back.

Re:Ripoff?

[BasilBrush]

Fair comment. The trouble is that I'm not sure what people downloading the latest Hollywood blockbusters on Bittorrent, burning a DVD and then spending the night at home watching it are doing to help those local independant cinemas.

Re:Ripoff?

[KingSkippus]

<rant style="rant-type:soapbox;">

they can either become investors or quit

Okay, this is the last reply I'm going to post on this topic, because this is as close to a flame war as I want to get. If you want the last word, feel free to post a reply and I'll let everyone bask in your victory. I diligently try to avoid the soapbox like this, but man, you just caught me at just the wrong moment.

Your post is typical of someone who has had a relatively nice middle-class ride through life and doesn't truly know what it's like to be an ordinary working class schmoe. It's awful easy to say stuff like "become and investor" and "quit" when you have spare money to invest and could find another job relatively easily.

I'm guessing that you don't understand what it's like to have no spare money or to be forced to work a miserable job to keep food on the table because I'm guessing you can't relate. You think that you "pulled yourself up by the bootstraps" and "made yourself what you are today" because you went to college on your parent's dime and/or government-provided scholarship, grant, and/or student loan programs. If you lost your job today, I'm guessing you probably have money stashed away that you could fall back on, or at worst, a family that would find some way to take care of you. You think you've earned everything you have, and if someone else is poor, they're not unfortunate, they're just lazy because they didn't work as hard as you did.

Well, I've got some news; news that you will probably not believe because you've so successfully fooled yourself into believing that you've earned everything you have, but others reading will probably understand all too well. In America today, how hard you work has very little to do with how successful you are. I'm not saying the executives don't work hard, because a lot do. But they like to think that their sixty to eighty hours a week somehow entitles them to the lion's share of profit. Guess what: Sixty to eighty hours a weeks is a normal work week for a LOT of people who are barely making ends meet. In fact, some of the people in the corporate trenches would consider a sixty hour week a vacation.

These people would like nothing better than to find a good job somewhere else and quit, but the other company they go to will be just as bad, and they would lose any vested time in any pittance of a retirement plan they may have, vacation time they have built up for being at the company several years, and so on. So yeah, it's easy to armchair-manage people's lives, telling them to quit and lose what little they have for something worse, if you're not the one who will actually have to pay the price for it.

It's not like executives sit down with the grunts on the line and work out what everyone thinks is fair compensation for all employees. No, they TELL employees what they'll get, and that will be as little as they can get away with. These days, it's gotten even worse because many executives don't really even care about the long term well-being of the company, as long as they get their bonus this year and their golden parachute next year. As a general rule (exceptions are few and FAR between), the executives that can get away with screwing the employees the hardest will be the most lavishly rewarded for doing so. Why? It's built into the corporate culture. Their job is to maximize profit and minimize costs (i.e. things like salary and benefits for average schmoes). Being fair to the employees isn't part of the equation; in fact, it is a significant hinderance.

Bringing it back on-topic, most of the people working on the film AREN'T being paid what they're "supposed" to be paid. They're being paid the bare minimum they can be paid. Even though both are in a sad state under the constant attacks they've suffered lately, we fortunately have things like unions and liberals around to try to ensure that the bare minimum will at least allow these people to eat. They "signed up" for it not because it

Re:Ripoff?

[emcmanus]

No, you're wrong. Production houses don't have a vertical monopoly on the industry, as you state.

Yes, it used to be true that houses owned all of the theaters in which their movies were shown, but that ended in 1948 when an antitrust case was brought against paramount (U.S. vs. Paramount Pictures, et. al) causing them, and others in suit, to divest their theaters.

I'd like to also point out that all of your examples of the movie industry "robbing america of its right to culture" are not the result of an evil mastermind, but the American Free Market. It's simple economy of scale, and it's the reason that you're paying $3.99 for a movie that cost millions to produce.

A CRUCIAL part to any free-market is the protection of individual property rights, and as value is increasingly being assigned to intangible property, this includes intellectual property, too.

So yes, George Lucas IS a role model for Americans.

Americans, remember. Not socialists.

Re:Ripoff?

[Atanamis]

I'm guessing that you don't understand what it's like to have no spare money or to be forced to work a miserable job to keep food on the table because I'm guessing you can't relate.

I will admit to being the guy with the nice middle class ride through life to whom you refer. I have never in my life worked a minimum wage job, and the least I was ever paid was $6.25 an hour as a lab assistant in college. I have never had difficulty finding work as a soccer referee for over $15/hr on weekends, I have taken entry level grocery bagger positions for $9/hr and I have babysat for $7.50 an hour. During college I mostly worked internships at around $13/hr, which combined with $30,000 in government subsidized loans paid my tuition.

As bad as the school system is in this country, schools and public libraries offer sufficient resources for any interested person to obtain an education. I was homeschooled from K-12 grade, which meant that for the most part I taught myself. By buying used books online, you are looking at an investment of a couple hundred dollars a year. (And if you don't believe me I can put together a book list to show you.) It does not require a privleged middle class upbringing to obtain a quality education. I will agree though that for a kid whose parents don't really care, getting a quality education is much more difficult.

Obtaining a state college education is also not difficult for someone wanting to do so. My local state school has in-state education costs of under $500 a semester. Take your highly motivated examples who work two full time jobs. At $10/hr each job, that person is making about $40,000 a year. While $10/hr is high for starting salary, it is well within the reach of someone who is a good employee and is willing to relocate. Particularly if said party is willing to live in an inexpensive area (ie NOT San Francisco), they can very quickly have enough savings to go to school. If they can continue to work while in school, they may be able to avoid even needing much from their savings.

The real way a person gets into an untenable position is by making poor decisions. Not obtaining a quality high school education is the first mistake most people make. They then follow this by getting married or having kids they can support that family. Our society is unwilling to wait for anything or plan for the future. A person cannot end up a single mother with 3 kids working a minimum wage job without making some stupid decisions. While I do believe we should help such people recover from those mistakes, your claims that people aren't at fault for where they are in life just do not reflect the facts.

Re:Ripoff?

[jonhuang]

Maybe they think it stinks, like everyone else in the world over 16?

But they want to see it anyway?

Re:Ripoff?

[thynk]

You just stated all the reasons why I still love my local drive in and continue to support it as best I can. I don't even sneak food into the place because I know that they stay in business by thier food sales.

Oh, that and when it's the just the wife and I, she thinks it's kinky to play around or get busy in the back seat like we're a couple of teenagers.

Interesting Verbage.

[Orcspit]

I find the specific words the author of that article used to be kinda interesting.

"Federal agents launched a crackdown on users of a popular new technology used to steal the latest "Star Wars" movie..."

Download instead of "steal" would have worked fine in that sentance. I guess steal just conveys a more sinister idea. Like roaving bands of junky Bit Torrent users are going to break into your home at any moment. The will "steal" anythign to get their fix!

"Within 24 hours, more than 10,000 copies of the "Star Wars" film had been swiped."

Ahh yes "swiped" the files were swiped from the servers, depriving the poor innocent children of their Star Wars!

I really hate CNN, they are getting as bad as Fox News.


-Orcspit

Re:Interesting Verbage.

[gorbachev]

You're surprised a media company, i.e. a major owner of copyrighted material, uses verbiage consistent with the positions of copyright owners' lobbyists (RIAA/MPAA)?

The fewer pirates will offset the new income...

[Pacifix]

How many people would have paid to see SW:III on opening night if they could download it, in order to avoid the lines? How many then would have paid again to see it in the theater to see in in full special effects glory? How many people now just buy their music from iTunes rather than pirate it, simply because it's easier? The huge gains media companies can reap from modern distribution would substantially lessen and offset the losses from piracy.

Compulsory Buying, Eh?

[reallocate]

Not only are you Canadian, you're a loon.

Just how is anyone selling anything ripping off anyone? No one is forcing anyone to buy anything.

Since most of the /. crowd really only cares about movies and throwaway music and other luxuries, maybe they ought to get a clue and realize that the way to thwart the Big Evil Corporate Bogeymen is to stop buying the stuff.

Smacks more than a bit of the obese bitching that Big Macs cost too much.

Re:RTJKJAS?

[str8]

I suspect the 'web developer' just put some garbage on the end of the word doc to prevent the fine Microsoft product (I'll tell you where you want to go today!) from deleting the blank lines.

Psst... Hey buddy, can you spare a .sig?

Obviously we're talking about subsets of unlimited

[millennial]

a selection of copyrighted works ... described as virtually unlimited

So this is virtually unlimited, but selective. As there are an infinite number of positive integers, but there is a larger infinite set of real numbers, EliteTorrents had a virtually unlimited selection, but they still didn't have everything.

I agree with what some others have said here - this looks like a DNS hijacking and fake warning. The Department of Homeland Security, Immigration and Customs Enforcement have absolutely nothing to do with copyright enforcement.

Re:Thepiratebay.org

[Capt'n Hector]

I don't know what your problem is, sir. I downloaded Star Wars III and don't remember raping any geese. But I do remember seeing it in my local movie theater a day later. I think the concentration of wealth that is Hollywood is proof positive that movies are overpriced. Has the P2P revolution hurt hollywod and the music industry? No, they've only helped it. Picture this: instead of vast recording companies, you have indepenent artists making their own music. They get exposure through word of mouth, P2P, etc. Their music is free for the taking. How do they make money then? Live concerts. So they won't be billionaires. Big deal, I won't have a hard time sleeping at night knowing I've prevented the latest pop idol from becoming extremely wealthy. As for movies? If the studios were smart, they would buy up audio and video hardware companies. Sooner or later, theater quality sound and video systems will become available to the home user and once that happens there will be no reason to go to a theater. Instead, the studios should make their movies free and make money off the presentation of their media. The more and better that media is, the more incentive there is to buy top quality gear. Kinda like the iTunes Music Store / iPod duality where the music is essentially free (apple makes nothing from iTMS) and the hardware to play it is the cash cow.

Anyway, just a thought. You can throw words like "illegal" and "rape" around all you want, but when Elite Torrents has more than a hundred thousand members alone... the people have spoken. It's time for something new.

I've got a plan!!!!

[CaymanIslandCarpedie]

The dissidents in (insert your favorite African nation experiencing genocide here) should setup a huge rack of servers dedicated to hosting pirated movies and music. Then all they have to do is sit back and wait. Within a couple weeks I'm sure the Marines would arrive to "liberate" the country.

If genocide isn't enough to get the good old USA to act, "stealing" a few bucks from their VERY wealthy citizens should do it.

Elite Torrents was not just movies/TV/Music

[dimfeld]

Most of the commenters are talking about movies and music, but ET hosted torrents for all sorts of things. They had major games, a lot of movies and TV series that were already on DVD, applications, etc.

The shutdown of Elite Torrents isn't really comparable to the recent shutdown of various TV torrent sites. Their range of categories went well outside of the grey area of TV downloading and its ilk.