The Pirate Bay is Here to Stay?

vitaly.friedman wrote to mention a Wired article about The Pirate Bay, a file-sharing crewe out of Sweden that thumbs its nose at the MPAA just for kicks and has yet to be shut down. From the article: "The Pirate Bay's legal adviser, law student Mikael Viborg, said the site receives 1,000 to 2,000 HTTP requests per second on each of its four servers. That's bad news for the content industries, which have fired off letter after menacing letter to the site, only to see their threats posted on The Pirate Bay, together with mocking replies. Viborg said that no one has successfully indicted The Pirate Bay or sued its operators in Swedish courts. Attorneys for DreamWorks and Warner Bros., two companies among those that have issued take-down demands to the site, did not return calls for comment."

Comments

Arrrrr

[TimeTrav]

Arrrrr, ye swabs cannot take back me booty so easily!

We demand..

[dotwhynot]

We demand that you provide us with entertainment by sending more legal threats. Please? :-)

Re:We demand..

[Jamu]

If you are not the intended recipient, you may not read, ...

Oh crap, I just did. Why didn't they warn me at the start of the message!

Gete your factes straighte

[spyrochaete]

The Pirate Bay isn't a "file sharing crewe", they're an open bittorrent tracker with a website. They're not a release group like Razor 1911 or The Humble Guys.

From the site's about page:

The Pirate Bay is the worlds largest bittorrent tracker. Bittorrent is a filesharing protocol that in a reliable way enables big and fast file transfers.

...

The Pirate Bay was started by the swedish anti copyright organization Piratbyrån in the late 2003, but is since October 2004 separated and run by dedicated individuals. Using the site is free of charge, but since running it costs money, donations are very much appreciated.

The EU will catch up

[Anonymous Coward]

There is a nice directive-in-the-making called IPRED2 which criminalises copyright infringement.

Not illegal

[michrech]

They aren't hosting any of the content. Only text files (as explained on their web page).

It is not illegal (Again, according to their web page) to host files that *point* to the content. Untill that changes in their country, they will stay alive (also, so long as they can keep their bills paid, that would help... :) )

Re:Not illegal

[hkmwbz]

"The information is made available in that form for the express purpose and with the express intent of facilitating theft."

Theft? Even if they did give you instructions on how to get to the nearest CD shop and you chose to steal a CD, that wouldn't matter. Are you saying that giving people directions should be illegal? That's silly. TPB doesn't give you driving instructions anyway.

Oh, you were talking about copyright infringement rather than actual theft (taking someone's belongings away from them), weren't you? Sorry, you got me all confused with your newspeak...

Re:Not illegal

[spyrochaete]

Thats sophistry. Without that information it would not be possible for people to steal the content. The information is made available in that form for the express purpose and with the express intent of facilitating theft.

That's the law. In the eyes of Swedish law, TPB is not facilitating theft, they are a library of text files. TPB has mentioned that as soon as storing text files becomes illegal they will provide hyperlinks to the text files. And when hyperlinks become illegal they will provide hyperlinks to the hyperlinks. They are committed to bogging down copyright more than providing a specific service to the people.

I, for one, am glad to see the beaurocracy of law choke on its own bulk. Despite what some mega corporations are whining for these days, many countries allow their citizens to share culture openly. To share and to be shared with, not to give or take and remove from the source.

Technology is granting great freedoms to the populace, and some countries feel the public needn't put a nickel in the jar every time they whistle a tune.

socialist-democratic not communist

[BoxedFlame]

The socialist-democratic movement has always been very keen on protecting the little guy, and that doesn't happen without protecting his/her rights.

Re:socialist-democratic not communist

[raju1kabir]

I think Sweden's view on not just protecting the rights of the minority, but also giving them some subsidy rights, is where they fail overall in having a much more powerful trade position as well as a more vibrant economy.

Calling this a failure is really dependent on the assumption that their primary goal is to have "a much more powerful trade position and a more vibrant economy." I would submit that the Swedish people have decided other things are more important.

I could easily be a lot richer than I am, but the tradeoffs are not worth it to me. That doesn't mean I'm a failure at wealth acquisition, any more than you're a failure at getting sex-change operations or being a circus clown.

Re:socialist-democratic not communist

[BVis]

Of course socialism doesn't truly protect the most important of all rights: the right to earn and keep property.

If you truly consider that the most important right of all, above every other right, you're pathologically materialistic and need an attitude adjustment.

In a society where personal property is de-emphasized, there is one benefit that you may be overlooking: nobody is subjected to the violence of poverty. There is a direct correlation between the number of freedoms enjoyed (and protected) in this country (I'm in the USA) and the income of the citizen in question. Before SLAPP legislation (and even after) people who spoke in a way that made the rich people (read: big business) look bad, or that called on them to take responsibility for their actions, were frequently named in lawsuits with no basis in the law, not designed to be won, or even tried, but intended to force the speaker to choose between shutting up and going bankrupt defending themselves. The current actions of the MPAA and the RIAA are analogous to this scenario, except the big money in this case is defending its "right" to require its customers to give them as much money as possible.

If you turn that example on its head, you'll see what I'm talking about: Let's say I'm a computer technician, with a clientele that includes small businesses and residential customers, and let's also say I'm really the only game in town. One day, someone, somewhere, invents a program that allows my customers to share information that I've given them in the course of doing my job. This is information that I've spent time and resources acquiring, and as a result of this sharing I lose business. If I tried to sue the developer of this program for my "lost business" I'd get laughed out of court, mostly because I can't afford the lawyers that have $3000 suits.

The gap between the rich and the poor in this country is widening every day, and there's really no middle class anymore; we're a country of haves and have-nots. These days it seems the only rights you have are the ones you can afford to defend. A deemphasis on personal material gain would alleviate this.

Re:socialist-democratic not communist

[truckaxle]

Why should the government be involved with deciding what I do with my property, be it my body, my house, or my wallet?

Because the property you earned during you life work and investiments was due to a stable society, economy and government investment in infastructure. I would prefer to have a society were wealth is based more on merit and hard work and not just because some distant ancestor made it big in plastics. There are several key arguments for an estate tax.

• Continued concentrate of power in the elite. In any democracy, wealth can be translated into political power. It is a fact of life. Rememeber Bush's address to a group of wealth business men, "This is an impressive crowd -- the haves and the have-mores. Some people call you the elite. I call you my base." Continued power concentrated in the hands of few will diminish the protection and representation of the unelite. Growing numbers of the very rich can give money to political candidates who support their personal agendas. "Those contributions clearly have an influence on public policy," Gates says, such as more tax breaks for the rich or weakening of regulations that protect consumers.
  
  
• Limit Innovation. A society full of undeserving rich kids travelling around collecting art work for their private collections does not induce innovation.
  
  
• Govt research and investments. Reducing taxes could crimp government research and investments in education -- the source of innovations that create jobs. With less education, growing numbers of workers can't get ahead.

Surprisingly very wealthy people such as Bill Gates Sr. and Warren Buffett support the death tax.

Re:(Don't) Call Your Congressman!

[spyrochaete]

Well said! You are right on the money about the freedom to do what you wish with the products you buy. Funny how such a socialist country retains so many freedoms, yet ironically the USA moves closer and closer to the communist ideal of state-owned property.

For those too shy to call, even a posted letter speaks decibels louder than an email or online petition. It might not hurt to speak to your elected official just the same. If and when enough noise is made on both fronts they will intersect at some point and the government will tihnk to itself "hey, I've heard this issue before".

Re:(Don't) Call Your Congressman!

[MikeBabcock]

You made a great comment that reminds me of something I've always been annoyed by as a canadian -- socialism is not contrary to freedom. Socialism is in fact designed to be freedom, freedom from poverty and medical expenses as well as personal freedom.

Socialism is simply contrary to pure capitalism, which obviously doesn't work (see neighbour, USA). Plenty of imprisonned people with no access to lawyers, lots of people living in complete poverty in major centers, no easy access to medical services for those without insurance, no easy access to pharmeceuticals to those not in the middle and high income brackets.

No success in Swedish courts

[Billosaur]

Viborg said that no one has successfully indicted The Pirate Bay or sued its operators in Swedish courts.

RIAA Lawyer: We are petitioning the court to shut down this illegal operation, called The Pirate Bay, on the grounds they are trafficking in illegally obtained and downloaded material.

Swedish Judge: Worrrr dooooo ishky dishky mooooovvvviesss kannnnshhhhhh veeeeeeeee downshky looooooodshky?

RIAA Lawyer: What?

Swedish Judge: Worrrr dooooo ishky dishky mooooovvvviesss kannnnshhhhhh veeeeeeeee downshky looooooodshky?

RIAA Lawyer: I don't understand!

Swedish Judge: Caaaaaaaaasssssshhhh dushmiskked, bork, bork, bork!

Re:How to be popular

[Stavr0]

The sad part is that a large number of slashdotters will convince themselves that this type of thing is good despite the fact that the site is very clearly engaged in theft. For the umpteenth time, no. Not theft. Copyright violation, or 'piracy', the land-based kind, where nobody gets boarded, killed and thrown to the sharks. And at that, they are not engaged in 'piracy' either. They are at most 'enablers' or 'accomplices'.

Further up, further in.

[Chas]

Apologies to C.S. Lewis.

Okay, this is a tracker site. It's going to be harder to justify pulling the whole site down because of the torrents it tracks.

However, if the companies are determined enough, they'll get the site yanked.

First they go to the tracker site itself.
Then they go to their provider.
Then they go to the provider upstream.
And up, and up the chain until they reach someone who WILL yank the plug.

Granted, if they proceed above a multi-homed provider, they have to go to an increasing number of upstream providers. At which point, it becomes a MASSIVE hassle. But, as I said, it all depends on how determined they are to down a site.

Not that I'd know anything about downing a site in this fashion....

Re:(Don't) Call Your Congressman!

[Dachannien]

Actually, writing or calling your Congressperson can be more informative than you're giving it credit for.

• If your representative has already made up his or her mind, you can tell from the response letter, and then you can plan to vote against them at the next election.
• If they're keeping an open mind, you can usually tell from their noncommittal response, and thus you'll know that continued pressure may have a positive effect.
• If they (or their office) are completely clueless, or the issue you're concerned about isn't really on their radar, their seemingly off-topic response will clue you in.

For example, my US Representative here in Cleveland, Ohio, is Stephanie Tubbs Jones. She typically puts most of her emphasis into social programs and other issues that the Congressional Black Caucus tends to work on. Not really much of a standard bearer when it comes to technology issues. But when I sent her office an e-mail opposing the Broadcast Flag a while back, the response I got wasn't the usual anti-piracy line that comes from misunderstanding the issue. That tells me that, while the letter didn't indicate a strong position on the issue, the broadcast flag, digital TV, and other consumer issues are gaining in importance with her.

Admittedly, when it comes to action in Congress, the will of the people often takes a back seat to partisan political wrangling, especially for Congresspeople with, er, higher political aspirations. But if you stay cynical and don't do anything at all, don't be surprised when they don't take your opinion into account.

Sweden vs US Capitalism

[Bluude]

My favorite was when they moved the servers to a new location across town. They even put up a GPS map showing their exact location so everyone would know how soon the site would be back up.

They must believe their country will protect them instead of hunting them down and arresting them.

I wonder if their government will still protect them when the US threatens to impose trade sanctions if they do not get rid of The Pirate Bay. Janet Reno did that with Australia and they caved soon after. Now Australia has some of the toughest copyright laws in the world. I think they are even harsher than the US equivalents.

Re:Sweden vs US Capitalism

[liangzai]

The Swedish government is not known to protect its citizens very well. Recently, the Justice Department and the security police caused the shut-down of a political party's website because of a cartoon of Muhammed looking at himself in the mirror with a blindfold, with the accompanying text "self-censorship". That is just about the tolererance level the Swedish government has.

Sweden is also notorious for being a leader in the EU implementing repressive laws in general and on the Internet in particular. The recent EU Data Directive is essentially one man's work, Swedish Justice minister Thomas Bodstrom, a former football player who smoked dope, somehow managed to become a lawyer and then to everybody's surprise was turned into minister of justice, on which position he has drafted more laws than anyone in history and effectively flushed personal integirty down the toilet. The directive, since long before in effect in Sweden, makes it mandatory for ISP:s to save customers' internet traffic data for at least two years. Other repressive measures in Sweden include a law against writing about other persons without their express permission unless being a journalist.

Sweden has also joined the ranks of the filter regimes, using DNS spoofing and other sabotages to the infrastructure to redirect pornsurfers looking for kiddie porn to a government website. It is not by law, but by cooperation with all the larger ISP:s (under threat of legislation).

You might also wonder why Sweden has not voiced concern over Chinese journalists being jailed in China. Well, that is because Sweden has had its own Shi Tao since the 70s, Jan Guillou (and Peter Bratt), who investigated and reported about an illegal spy organisation (Inormation Bureau) and subsequently was put to jail for espionage.

One might have the impression that Sweden is a free and modern welfare state, but those days are since long gone. Today's Sweden is the leading oppressor in Europe, with no-tolerance laws on everything from gambling to prostitution and drugs. The Swedish government sees the Internet mostly as an outlet for hate speech, porn and illegal downloading, and if they would decide to shut down the Pirate Bay during a lunch break, it would be done in a matter of minutes by a simple phone call.

Perfectly legal in Sweden.

[Trash]

By Swedish this is perfectly legal. Some years ago a guy was sued for posting links to mp3's on his web page. And the Swedish court desided that it was nothing wrong with that. He didn't ditribute the mp3's only showing were they where. And the same thing is pirate bay doing now.

Hope my english is better the Swede in the muppets show.

Re:(Don't) Call Your Congressman!

[Scarblac]

You physically own a CD. The contents of that CD, you simply own the right to listen to them. [...] Other people invested large amounts of time, money, and resources into recording and producing the music that you paid for...they are the ones who paid for it, they are the ones who have a right to distribute it.

That is true, they do have that right - but not because they were the ones who paid for it (after all, if I manufacture chairs, pay for the cost, then sell them, I don't have that right), or because it's some sort of natural human right. They have that right because the people decided to make a copyright law, that gives them that right for a limited time. It was a good idea at the time, but, if the people decide that the balance has now gone too far towards the music industry, the laws can be changed and the "right" will be gone.

And it is a weird right - after all, as the grandparent says, something you physically own is usually yours to do with as you please. That's what ownership means, and it's a rather more fundamental right than copyright.

The problem is that the industry is trying to have it both ways. Act as if they're selling a single physical thing, then restrict your use by saying you only bought a license.

I'd be fine with buying a license for music - I'd pay for the license to listen to a song. If that means I can replace a scratched CD for a fee equal to the cost of pressing it; if I could redownload a song whenever I wanted, say if I accidentally deleted it; if I could make personal copies to listen to it on whatever gadget I may own. That'd be fair - I paid for the right to listen to it, so I can listen to it.

The problem is that the industry is trying to have it both ways.

If it's a license I bought, why did I have to buy the CD for the full price when I already owned the LP?

Sweden is far ahead of the rest of the world.

[babbling]

I'm an Australian who has just returned to Australia from a 1.5-month long trip to Sweden. Sweden is doing so many things right and it's really unfortunate that Australia isn't a bit more like Sweden.

First of all, there's not nearly as much crime in Sweden as there is in Australia. The Swedish government takes proper care of their people, so no one feels a need to commit crime. There's no homeless people sleeping in parks at night. People are much, much friendlier.

They also don't have any terrorist panic. There's no "terrorism alert levels", and there isn't much security. There's not even nearly as many police around as there is in Australia. The Swedes haven't made enemies for themselves by invading other countries, so they don't need to be afraid of any terrorists attacking them. The Swedes are more "free" than Americans are, which proves that terrorists don't hate America because they "hate freedom", as George Bush wants everyone to think. They attack America because America attacked them and is occupying their countries.

Sweden will probably also now lead the way in having free culture. They will soon show that money can be made even from creating free culture. Hopefully the rest of the world will follow their lead. Unfortunately, the rest of the world seems to be going crazy.

I just hope everyone who reads this post can imagine what life would be like to live in a country where you don't need to be afraid of terrorism or crime, a country where almost all of the population gets a good education, and all this despite alcohol (and probably other drugs) being more easily accessible in this country. Americans have been brainwashed into thinking that such a country can't exist, but it's important that everyone knows it does, for that is how other countries can follow the Swedes' lead in being a more peaceful, calmer, and better educated population.

Re:Sweden is far ahead of the rest of the world.

[wootest]

As a swede, it's a strange feeling reading these kinds of comments.

To say that I voraciously live through the Internet would be wrong, but I do practically live in some sort of pseudo-american culture when I'm spending any amount of time online. Swedish, real life friends, sure, they're there too, but my AIM buddy list (the one I use to keep in touch with online friends) is longer by far than the MSN Messenger list (swedish friends).

Every day I read on Slashdot and on other sites about how freedoms are in the process of being taken away. Mostly, the problems are international or apply globally in some ways, but a surprisingly big chunk is US domestic. I'm really quite surprised you haven't risen up, shook your heads and beaten the crap out of your established political system yet - as an outsider, it seems like the "American" thing to do, if I'm to believe various over-patriotic messages relayed to me over the years.

What I think is happening is this: the US is more and more about its government. Two major political parties and a winner-takes-all system in general does that. The "American" thing has evolved towards supporting the government, instead of the government supporting the people. And any government today - especially Republican, *it seems* - "are not above a little bribery and corruption in the same way that the sea is not above the clouds" (thanks, Douglas Adams). What you have is the government, who is either to be awed or to be ignored, played around by the corporations while your civil rights go straight down the can and anyone who opposes is a communist^Wterrorist. (McCarthy would have been proud, from all I hear.)

I'm not saying my analysis is right. I'm currently not 'rooting' for one of the major american parties, though I am certainly rooting against the current administration. I'm just saying that it's odd that Sweden's the one following the 'socialism' ideology branch, while it's the american citizens who have to take in in the hiney from their government.

And for what it's worth, Sweden is far from perfect. But there's no doubt in my mind that it's the american citizen that's worse off of the two.

The Pirate Bay is identical in nature to Google

[Anonymous Coward]

It's important to realize that The Pirate Bay does not host any infringing content on its servers.

The Pirate Bay is identical in nature to Google:

Both sites allow users to enter searches from a web page, and both return a list of links to (sometimes infringing) content.

If The Pirate Bay can be shut down, then Google can be shut down.

Re:How to be popular

[10Ghz]

The site is engaged in theft

Theft means that someone deprives someone else from their property. Who is being deprived of their property here? I believe that the word you are looking for is "copyright infringment", not "theft". The two acts are called different, because they are different acts. downloading movies is not called theft because it's not theft.

Sure you can rationalize a set of values where taking a movie off bittorrent is different from stealling a DVD off the shelf of a store.

There is a huge difference between those two

But the reason people have moderated my original comment down as troll even though it is nothing of the kind is because they know deep down that what I am saying here is correct and they don't like to hear it.

Or you were modeed down because your comment was just plain WRONG, not to mention stupid? What Pirate Bay or it's users are doing is NOT theft, not even close. You can't call it theft because it's not theft.