Slashdot Mirror


The Pirate Bay Is Back Online

Many readers have submitted news that The Pirate Bay is back online, operating for now as "The Police Bay." Writes one anonymous submitter: "Pirate Bay got new hardware, moved the servers abroad and used recent backups. So the only bad side-effect of this police raid is that hundreds of clients of the ISP PRQ still have not got their servers back from the police. When the police did the raid on Wednesday, they took Pirate Bay from Bankgirot's secure server room. Then they also took all the servers in PRQ colocation facility STH3, effectively disabling a lot of small companies. The connection between PRQ and TPB? - Same owners, nothing more, this is beginning to become a huge scandal in Sweden with coverage on TV and all newspapers 4 days in a row."

934 comments

  1. MPAA/RIAA press release by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

    When can we expect the MPAA/RIAA press release issued the other day to mysteriously disappear from the public record (or at least the org's sites)? Oh and will we see another press release saying the MPAA/RIAA got pwnt?

    1. Re:MPAA/RIAA press release by Ann+Coulter · · Score: 4, Informative

      Well, for the record, 2006_05_31.pdf.

    2. Re:MPAA/RIAA press release by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Why not use the MPAA's bandwith?

      http://www.mpaa.org/press_releases/2006_05_31.pdf

    3. Re:MPAA/RIAA press release by Cartzca · · Score: 5, Funny

      "The MPAA has a multi-pronged approach to fighting Internet piracy, which include educating people about the consequences of piracy" Is this going to be the old-school 'piracy == terrorism' line? I hope not; I'm look for a more SouthPark style: 'Here's X's private jet, notice anything? X used to have a Gulfstream 4, but now she's had to sell it and get a Gulfstream 3 because people like you used to download her music for free. The Gulfstream 3 doesn't even have a remote control for its surround sound DVD system. Still think downloading music for free is no big deal?'

    4. Re:MPAA/RIAA press release by fbjon · · Score: 5, Funny

      That's interesting, they compare the popularity of thepiratebay.org (21st in Sweden by Alexa), with CNN.com (125th in Sweden, Alexa). Color me surprised: a swedish site is more popular in sweden than an american site.

      --
      True confidence comes not from realising you are as good as your peers, but that your peers are as bad as you are.
    5. Re:MPAA/RIAA press release by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      thepiratebay.com in the statment? I was under the impression TPB is an .org.

    6. Re:MPAA/RIAA press release by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      For more information, contact:
      MPAA Los Angeles
      Kori Bernards or Elizabeth Kaltman
      (818) 995-6600

      MPAA Washington, D.C.
      John Feehery or Gayle Osterberg
      (202) 293-1966

    7. Re:MPAA/RIAA press release by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      I'm pretty sure there's a .com that redirects to the .org too :)

    8. Re:MPAA/RIAA press release by cfuse · · Score: 1
      That's interesting, they compare the popularity of thepiratebay.org (21st in Sweden by Alexa), with CNN.com (125th in Sweden, Alexa). Color me surprised: a swedish site is more popular in sweden than an american site.

      In other news: tits more popular than dog crap.

    9. Re:MPAA/RIAA press release by Munrobasher · · Score: 1

      Maybe the halcyon days of the big movie and music companies are over. Maybe we've had enough of paying over the odds for music CDs whereby a very small percentage gets back to the musician. But maybe we're happy with the amount they do get as they seem to do quite well thank you very much.

      Other industries have had to adapt when new technology came along. Digital cameras weren't banned by traditional film manufacturers. Every digital photo I take is 10p less in the coffers of Kodak. I appreciate not exactly an accurate analogy but you get the idea. Why should the movie and music industry be different. Heck, if I could download an album for £1, there is a *very* high chance I might end up spending more per year than before. I don't rent movies anymore as I've got movies on demand via cable. I didn't see Blockbuster trying to shutdown NTL or Sky movies on demand.

      They had to evolve or go under.

      The movie and music industry has to do the same. We know that, they just haven't realised yet. No, I'm not surprised they are trying to protect their huge income - we'd all do the same. But the way they are doing it isn't helping their cause in the slightest.

      As for whether the pirate bay is actually breaking the law in Sweden I'm not going to comment. It's murky enough already. Even they aren't breaking a Swedish law, we all know that something isn't quite right.

      But at the end of the day "Do we care?"...

  2. Sucks to be the MPAA... by oberondarksoul · · Score: 5, Funny

    So soon they crowed victory, so soon will they be humbled. By the looks of things the takedown of the Pirate Bay was less than legal, and now with the 'Bay back online the MPAA must be feeling more than a little upset. Personally I'm of the view that the Pirate Bay was perfectly legal - they didn't carry any copyrighted works themselves, just as Google don't carry the materials they link to. What fun this whole affair will turn out to be...

    --
    And tomorrow the stock exchange will be the human race
    1. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by Dredd13 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Pirate Bay is *more* legal than Google. Google at least exists in this "grey area" -- with things like Google Cache, and things like that, where they actually DO distribute the actual copyrighted content themselves occasionally. Nothing that the Pirate Bay serves up is actually copyrighted, since it's just .torrent files.

    2. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Google==US, and US law explicitly makes caching legal and .torrent files illegal.

    3. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by wetfeetl33t · · Score: 0

      From TFPB:
      "Only torrent files are saved at the server. That means no copyrighted and/or illegal material are stored by us. It is therefore not possible to hold the people behind The Pirate Bay responsible for the material that is being spread using the tracker."

      I'm no legal expert, so I dunno if this statement is legally feasable.

      --
      Register the editry.
    4. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by Dredd13 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Exactly which law makes torrent files illegal? Please be prepared to cite chapter and verse.

    5. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by Anonymous+Brave+Guy · · Score: 1

      And for that matter, exactly which law makes caching (in the sense of Google Cache) legal?

      --
      If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
    6. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Careful not to cross the line out of Democracy.

    7. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by Adult+film+producer · · Score: 1

      I bet you're not a swedish legal expert either.

    8. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by Whafro · · Score: 1

      That's an erroneous request. You don't show what makes something legal, as it's presumed (in the US, etc) that your actions are legal until it's demonstrated that you have broken some law. So you don't request to be shown why something is legal, but instead why something isn't.

    9. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by giorgiofr · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Don't you realize this will turn around and bite you in the ass someday? I am as bad a pirate as they come, but please... "Exactly which law makes torrent files illegal?" is as stupid a question as "Exactly which law makes operating a finger on a trigger illegal?". Well nobody condems the act of pulling the trigger on a gun; if somebody gets killed as a consequence, though, I think you won't find it absurd that the police is involved. Just the same applies here. We all know a good part of the stuff distributed THANKS TO TPB was illegal (we might discuss the logic behind making distribution of copyrighted material illegal, but as it stands it IS illegal) so please, protest the illegality of the seize, protest what you want but don't go around shaking a stick at people and screaming "Ah, but I'm not touching you! I'm not touching you!". You know, officer, I didn't kill this guy, and anyway what law prevents me from using my finger?

      --
      Global warming is a cube.
    10. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by Idimmu+Xul · · Score: -1, Troll

      Fortunatly, you're stupid.

      --
      The problem with slashdot is that most of its users were bullied and stuffed into lockers as kids!
    11. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by mondoterrifico · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Worst analogy ever.

    12. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Linking to (copyright infringing) torrents is illegal per the case law.

      The DMCA makes ISP caching legal and also provides a 'safe harbor' so that Google et al doesn't get shut down to copyright infringment.

    13. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by cduffy · · Score: 5, Informative

      The US has laws explicitly addressing "contributory infringement", where one assists others engaging in copyright infringement but doesn't do so themselves. Sweden doesn't. EOM.

    14. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by linvir · · Score: 4, Funny

      Your analogy sucks balls. The Pirate Bay would be more analogous to a gun distributor, with the actions of gun owners as their own responsibility. And even then the analogy only sucks balls a tiny bit less. In Anarchist Slashdot, balls suck analogies.

    15. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by Clopy · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Horrible example. But in your own example, it would like if the police went after the manufacturer of the gun instead of the shooter. The PirateBay is not responsible for the use of torrents. Downloading TES:Oblivion would be perfectly legal in my country, as long as I also have had an original copy bought. It is not PirateBay's fault if I don't have the copy. PirateBay is legal, I am legal if I have bought a copy. Perhaps someone downloading from me could be illegal, but again that's not PirateBay's fault. That's his responsibility.

    16. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      I don't under stand the finger analogy. Please use one involving a car.

    17. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Informative

      What country are you from, giorgiofr (887762)? I imagine you are American. So your understanding of copyright law in a foreign country an ocean removed from you is suspect at best.

      There is no connection between shooting to kill someone with a gun and copying a file on a computer, unless your goal is to enflame. Your straw-man arguments do no good here.

      The police raid of TPB (at the direction of the United States) is widely believed to have been illegal under the laws of the country in which the raid took place. Attempting to applying U.S. legal theory to the situation does not magically change the jurisdiction. Why does the United States and some of its citizens believe respecting the sovereignty of nations is optional?

    18. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by BootNinja · · Score: 2, Insightful

      except for the fact that he said "Google==US, and US law explicitly makes caching legal and .torrent files illegal." he said that there is a law making it legal. they were just asking which law that was.

    19. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why do you think TPB was able to continue its operation for as long as it did? Were it patently illegal it'd been taken down ages ago.

    20. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by swimin · · Score: 1

      Think of the Pirate Bay as a store that hosts an exchange for people to give guns away. Is the store responsible for what the people do with those guns?

    21. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by boron+boy · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Guns, don't kill people, people kill people. Tracker sites don't infringe copyright, people infringe copyright.

    22. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by giorgiofr · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Wrong guess, I'm from the EU. My understading of copyright law in a foreign country a few Km away from me is not that bad, especially when I've been reading a bit about it. What you and your trolling friends refuse to admit is that TPB encourages and facilitates sharing copyrighted material. I will continue to use it no matter what Swedish law says (is it OK, is it not? Like I care...) but I will NOT kid myself into believing that TPB knows nothing about the Windows ISOs you can download thanks to their portal. The post I replied to was trying to get away with a ridiculous technicality which didn't make any sense, that's why I compared to another nonsensical one.

      The police raid of TPB (at the direction of the United States) is widely believed to have been illegal under the laws of the country in which the raid took place. Attempting to applying U.S. legal theory to the situation does not magically change the jurisdiction.

      Yeah, so what? I don't care about the raid, I am simply pointing out that TPB is happy to help with piracy. They don't host the material, OK. They're in the clear wrt Swedish law, OK. So what? It does not mean you can pretend that piracy does not take place thanks to their portal. Then if their law allows this, more power to them.

      Why does the United States and some of its citizens believe respecting the sovereignty of nations is optional?

      I don't know, ask an American. In the meantime, were you in favour or against the bombing raids on Milosevic? What do you think of regulating the activity of farmers in my country so that the farmers in yours get a better/worse ROI? And I could make countless examples... Don't believe Europe is immune to this kind of games. The USA are definitely not alone.

      --
      Global warming is a cube.
    23. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by illuminatedwax · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You know, ordinarily, police would love it if someone was distributing locations and phone numbers for drug dealers. Why doesn't the *AA thank them for giving them the IP addresses of illegal filesharers?

      --
      Did you ever notice that *nix doesn't even cover Linux?
    24. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      No, your examples are irrelevant to the TPB case.

      Lets say I want to kill all the Sarah Connor in L.A. I use a phonebook to get their phone number and address. Then, I go to these addresses to kill them (by pressing my finger on a trigger, with a pointed stick or with a banana).

      Can the phonebook editor be responsible for the murder of all the Sarah Connor ?

      TPB is only providing a "phonebook".

    25. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by md04 · · Score: 4, Funny

      Sorry, I am afraid that every good slashdotter knows that guns don't kill people.. Chuck Norris does.

    26. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by XSforMe · · Score: 3, Funny

      The MPAA wants to know which one is your favourite movie!

      The Curse of the Pirate Bay
      Pirates of the Baltic Sea
      The Return of the Pirate Bay

      Can you think of others? Let them know at www.mpaa.org!

      --
      My other OS is the MCP!
    27. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by Xaositecte · · Score: 1

      http://www.boingboing.net/2006/01/26/google_cache_ is_lega.html

      It was in question, and brought up before a court - now the court decision explicitly makes Cacheing legal. When someone uses language like the gp did in reference to the American legal system, they're generally referring to a court ruling, not a law.

      No such court decision exists for Torrent files, to the best of my knowledge.

    28. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by BlueCodeWarrior · · Score: 1

      This is true. What they were referring to is the fact that a cache makes a copy of copyrighted content and then redistributes it without the permission of the author. So what exception to copyright law makes that illegal?

    29. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by kzadot · · Score: 2, Interesting
      "Exactly which law makes torrent files illegal?" is as stupid a question as "Exactly which law makes operating a finger on a trigger illegal?". Well nobody condems the act of pulling the trigger on a gun; if somebody gets killed as a consequence, though, I think you won't find it absurd that the police is involved.

      Great analogy, bad interpretation. Operating a finger on a trigger is not illegal, and neither should be, or a lot of soldiers, hunters and farmers would be in a lot of trouble. Murdering someone is however, and should be, illegal. In the same way, operating a web sites that shares torrent files containing no copyright material at all is not illegal and neither should it be, but distributing actual copyright material, that, well actually that shouldnt be illegal either, but it is, so at least the police would have reason to investigate people doing that, but taking down a torrent site just has no legal justification whatsoever.
    30. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by ericdano · · Score: 2, Insightful

      But what if Sarah Connor specifically requested to be removed from the phone book, and was not. Then who was at fault?

      You could argue that the MPAA has requested many times to be removed from the phonebook, and the PirateBay phonebook company has refused them.

      Regardless though, it's people who actually download the torrents and use them that are at fault.

      --
      It's either on the beat or off the beat, it's that easy.
      I moderate therefore I rule!
      --
    31. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by SECProto · · Score: 0

      The thing is, facilitating copyright infringement, as you put it, isn't illegal in sweden.

    32. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And as a follow up, I rather enjoy the replys to my original post. 99% outright ignorant morons. Slashdot really shows its ass on these stories.

    33. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by dubbreak · · Score: 3, Insightful

      So why then would the US go after a company in sweden that does not have those law, while they leave local companies that go beyond "contributory" (ala google with their caching)?

      OK the answer is obvious, but what happens when all the torrent sites are shut down? Does the MPAA go after the search engines next?

      --
      "If you are going through hell, keep going." - Winston Churchill
    34. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by Lehk228 · · Score: 1

      contributory infringement depends on the purpose of the contributor. a search engine exists to find information for the user, and may have incidental infringements which fall under fair use. a torrent site exists primarilly to contribute to infringement

      --
      Snowden and Manning are heroes.
    35. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      OK the answer is obvious, but what happens when all the torrent sites are shut down? Does the MPAA go after the search engines next?

      Short answer: no.

      For the situation in the USA, see Title II Section 512(d) of DMCA. Or, for the lazy, search for "512" here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Online_Copyright_Infr ingement_Liability_Limitation_Act

      How hard are the concepts of contributory infringement and the communications/caching/search engine provision to understand??? Is it mostly that people don't want to understand this stuff, preferring to be ignorant so they don't have to admit to themselves that they are doing something illegal?

    36. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by SilentChris · · Score: -1, Troll

      That's some really fuzzy logic.

      You could just as easily say that Pirate Bay is "less legal". Google at least serves up useful information. A minority of what they serve up leads to piracy. Practically every link Pirate Bay offers leads people to pirate things.

      It's akin to an interstate versus a back alley. Sure, the interstate may *eventually* get you to the shady characters, but the back alley leads straight to them.

      Last I checked, the cops heavily traffic the back alleys in my area, until all the scum is removed...

    37. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by subterfuge · · Score: 1

      nice - that one made it worth getting up this morning.

    38. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by Reverend528 · · Score: 1
      Nothing that the Pirate Bay serves up is actually copyrighted, since it's just .torrent files.

      Well, if they were made in the US, the torrent files probably ARE copyrighted, unless the creators of the torrents explicitly released them into the public domain.

    39. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by Prof.Phreak · · Score: 1

      I wonder if .torrent file can be considered a `derived work' from the copyrighted stuff... Hmm... (you wouldn't have them hashes without the original).

      --

      "If anything can go wrong, it will." - Murphy

    40. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by petermgreen · · Score: 2, Informative

      The direct benifits (if any) from dragging one person through the courts and ruining thier life aren't worth the cost of doing it and criminal charges for filesharing clients seems quite unlikely.

      so the only reason to take individual filesharers to court is as a scare tactic, it works to some extent but to have a significant effect on piracy they would really have to significantly increase the chances of getting into trouble.

      breaking down the networks used for piracy on the other hand will make life harder for pirates who will have to keep finding new good networks and maybe some will give up in the process.

      --
      note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
    41. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by ArsenneLupin · · Score: 3, Insightful
      Moreover, what if the phonebook company would market their product specifically as a tool for hitmen, and even named their books "The hitman's lists"? It's hard to claim innocence with such a name...

      (Not that I don't agree with their service. The MPAA does deserve to go out of business. But claiming innocence about the service's intended usage is pushing it a little bit too far...)

    42. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by IndigoParadox · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I hate to be cynical, but in my area they heavily traffic the interstate until everyone has a ticket for going 3 MPH over the speed limit. Back alleys aren't as profitable so they're not really a concern. =OP

    43. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by Dredd13 · · Score: 1
      From the article you reference:

      512(b) System caching This says that system caching conducted in standard ways and not interfering with copy protection systems is fine. If the cached material is made available to end users the system provider must follow the takedown and put back provisions. This may apply to situations like the proxy and caching servers used by many large ISPs and a very wide range of other providers. Copyright lawyers disagree on whether or not it applies to something like the Google cache [4], with some arguing that it is not collected at the direction of an end user but by Google crawling the web itself. Google may be able to do this instead under the doctrine of fair use. In the case of online newspapers Google has chosen to produce a non-caching news portal rather than resolve the question in court. [Emphasis Added]
      So maybe, just maybe, it's not quite as clear-cut as you'd like to think it is.
    44. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by genooma · · Score: 1

      A TXT file with a name similar to a movie's name doesn't violate privacy rights, a movie's name is public information, its not the same type of information that a name or a phone number.
      I fail to see why the pirate bay should remove that TXT file.

    45. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by Overzeetop · · Score: 1

      So, what your saying is that it's more economical to destroy a legal undertaking which is connected to a large group of independant unlawful operations than it is to take action against the unlawful operations themselves.

      I tell you, I wish we had the NRA on our side in this one. They've really mastered the art in this category.

      --
      Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
    46. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Special thanks to 2600 and DeCSS, if I remember correctly.

    47. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by Hentai · · Score: 5, Insightful

      what happens when all the torrent sites are shut down?

      Incidentally, when's the last time YOU won a game of "whack-a-mole" with an infinite number of levels?

      --
      -Hentai [in vita non pacem est]
    48. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      The concept of contributor infringement is old, but the Napster case pretty much set the standard in the digital world. Basically if you intend to assist someone else in copyright infringmeet, you're guilty of it yourself. This at least is somewhat sensible.

      If you made a mistake or something, you get a free chance to remove it (the "safe harbor"). Google will remove links if people make a dmca complaint.

      OTOH, the 2600 case was about linking to a circumvesion device. Very orwellian.

    49. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by rich_r · · Score: 2, Insightful

      In the US, anyway. Sweden? Anyones guess...

    50. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by Firehed · · Score: 1

      Something tells me that posting something online with the intent of having others downloading it would be releasing them into the public domain. Anyways, they're being uploaded to a once-Swedish-now-???? server where US copyright laws don't quite apply.

      --
      How are sites slashdotted when nobody reads TFAs?
    51. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by e4g4 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      This is actually an interesting point. I once had an issue with a certain member of the MPAA over my possesion (and "distribution") of a certain movie about hobbits. I was on a University network at the time using a public DC hub (stupid, i know...). At any rate, I got an email forwarded by some admin from the movie company, listing my mac address, ip, and the names of two files that I was sharing - they were - "The_Lord_of_the_Rings_two_towers[Xvid].part1.avi" and "The_Lord_of_the_Rings_two_towers[Xvid].part2.avi" (this was when the movie was still in theaters - and, I might add, I had already plunked down $11.50 to see the movie). Having never successfully downloaded the movie, I went to investigate, and saw that I was sharing two 1.5 MB files that, when played, showed 4 seconds of black screen each - and that was it. Nevertheless, they were threatening all sorts of legal action and whatnot, though it amounted to a cease and desist. So my question is - assuming those were the only files I was sharing ;-) - was I breaking any law?

      --
      The secret to creativity is knowing how to hide your sources. - Albert Einstein
    52. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As an American I can tell you that not all of us approve of what our leaders are doing. In fact, I there are very few things that the bush administration has done that I approve of. The only one that comes to mind was the do not call list for telemarketers, though there are a few others.

    53. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by el_nino · · Score: 4, Informative

      One difference between US and Swedish law is that in Sweden even non-commercial copyright infringement is a crime, which means that it is covered by the general rules for being an accessory or an accomplice to crime (Brottsbalken 23:4). This was never conclusively tried by the Swedish Supreme Court in the so-called "BBS case" (NJA 1996 s. 79), where the sysop of a BBS was prosecuted for letting users illegally share software. The reason is that the prosecutor never claimed that the sysop was an accessory or accomplice to acts committed by his user, instead claiming that the sysop was illegally making the software available to the public by letting users download the software from his BBS. The court held that the sysop could not be convicted because there was no act actually performed by the sysop, and because the prosecution hadn't initially claimed he was an accomplice to someone elses copyright infringement the court was unable to consider that possibility due to Swedish trial rules (Rättegångsbalken 30:3, som innebär att domstolen bara kan döma för en gärning som innefattas av åklagarens gärningsbeskrivning).

      Hence no one can be totally sure whether The Pirate Bay is legal in Sweden, because the legal precedent is not 100% clear. The question if intent should be very interesting here. While it should be evident that The Pirate Bay is set up with intent that people should be able to use it to commit crimes, the proprietors have no knowledge of what copyright infringement users are going to commit and no direct intent that those specific crimes will be committed.

      The claim that Sweden doesn't have laws against "contributory infringement" is wrong, however.

    54. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by SilentChris · · Score: 3, Funny

      I live near NYC. We have a lot of back alleys and everyone drives 3 MPH.

    55. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by houghi · · Score: 3, Informative

      Not sure what country you are from, but where I am from the police needs evidence. They can not just arrest the owner of the number. They can not even just call him and ask him to sell them some drugs.

      In Belgium (where I am from) the cout has stated that it won't go after distributors who just share. It will only go after people who do copyright infrengements for money.

      So what would happen is the following. **AA gives the IP to the police. The police brings it to the court and the court drops the case. As this brings unneeded work to the police, they would NOT be happy with it.

      The local version of the **AA have tried to bring cases to court and where told to come back when money was exchanged. They also have tried to intimidate providers and some just informed their customers that they MIGHT be doing illegal and that that would be against the AUP. However as long as there is no courtcase, a provider can not give my information to SABAM (the local organisation) and they are not allowed to look wether I am sharing the latest SUSE torrent, a movie I made myself or the movie Daens.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    56. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by Jim_Callahan · · Score: 2, Funny

      You understand that US-style foreign policy is not unique, and has been the standard since before the US was anything resembling a significant nation?

      Who let you into slashdot? /smiley

      --
      ...it's really a sad day for America when we require a goddamn ACT OF CONGRESS to make our DVD players work properly. ~
    57. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by hotspotbloc · · Score: 4, Informative
      Pirate Bay is *more* legal than Google.

      Considering last weekend Google Video had a full copy (view and download) of "Fear and Loathing" I'd say they're tied. Hell, at one point it was number 35. I'm sure there was somekind of age-check-before-download (there has to be a single, cool word in German for that) to protect the children from such dangerous thoughts.

      A cache of the page: http://64.233.179.104/search?q=cache:ZwUcUdtinKUJ: video.google.com/videoplay%3Fdocid%3D-572069601692 0047541+google-video%2Bfear-and+loathing&hl=en&gl= us&ct=clnk&cd=1&client=firefox

      Shpxva' terng.

      --
      "I hate to advocate drugs, alcohol, violence or insanity but they've always worked for me" - HST
    58. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by Anonymous+Brave+Guy · · Score: 1

      OK guys, if you're going to comment on legal things, at least read the small print, and the informed commentary on the Field case. Hint: read the bit about being well aware of the mechasisms to opt out, the deliberate settings that didn't do this, the court's view on the significance of this, and the effect this has on any precedent that was set.

      --
      If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
    59. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by Anonymous+Brave+Guy · · Score: 1, Troll

      Nice try. By default, copying material that is subject to copyright without permission is explicitly illegal. Care to duck the question on a technicality again?

      --
      If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
    60. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by kdemetter · · Score: 1

      hey , i'm from Belgium too .

      funny how worlds collide :-)

      Ok , that was off-topic .

    61. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by Snaller · · Score: -1, Troll

      Pirate Bay is *more* legal than Google.

      Nonsense. The sole purpose of pirate bay is to facilitate crime, Google has a ton of uses and occasionally, very rarely, they may end up hosting something they shouldn't - for a brief while. Google removes things from the cache, the pirate bay tells people to fuck off. They have been asking for it forever.

      --
      If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
    62. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by chris_7d0h · · Score: 1

      Everyone is a criminal, all you need to do is watch them long enough and you'll eventually catch them committing a felony

      --
      In a society that believes in nothing, fear becomes the only agenda ~ Bill Durodié
    63. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by HexRei · · Score: 1

      Prosecuting copyright infringement requires a plaintiff. It is a crime against a specific party, not "the people". So unless the people who created the torrent files are interested in taking action, its pretty much irrelevant.

    64. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by MrPerfekt · · Score: 1

      OK the answer is obvious, but what happens when all the torrent sites are shut down? Does the MPAA go after the search engines next?

      No, of course not, after all the torrent sites are shut down nobody will pirate movies anymore and the MPAA member's revenue will jump 10 fold. I mean c'mon, they've been telling us that for years. You don't believe it?

      --
      I just wasted your mod points! HA!
    65. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by AmVidia+HQ · · Score: 1
      --
      VIVA1023.com | Political Fashion.
    66. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by HexRei · · Score: 4, Informative

      The sole purpose of pirate bay is to facilitate crime,
      No. Their sole purpose is to host torrent files. Whether those are torrents of copyrighted works or public domain works is not something they consider, they host them either way. So your statement is inaccurate.

      Google removes things from the cache, the pirate bay tells people to fuck off.

      Well, duh. When its in google's cache, they are directly hosting it on their servers- that's a crime, no ambiguity included. Do you think they clear all pages of sites like TPB or www.torrentspy.com from their cache as well? Of course not, because they know its not illegal. In fact... hey look, a google cache of a page linking directly to a torrent file of a copyrighted work!

    67. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by trewornan · · Score: 1

      To qualify for copyright something has to have some kind of creative content, simple lists of things (for example) do not qualify. I'm pretty sure that a torrent file which contains little more than file hashes and ip addresses would not qualify for copyright protection either.

    68. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by cgenman · · Score: 1

      Your sucking balls metaphor sucks balls. The grandparent poster's analogy is more like accidentally nibbling balls. And even then the similie only sucks balls slightly less, metaphorically speaking.

    69. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by mpcooke3 · · Score: 1

      Actually i disagree. I think the parent was making a valid legal point.

      Google is involved in massive actual copyright infringement and get's away with it because it usually is in website owners interests. Also they will usually obey takedown notices (see scientology) when the copyright holder objects.

      ThePirateBay is not directly involved in copyright infringement and is probably legal under local laws but does get raided by the police.

    70. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by bit01 · · Score: 1

      maybe some will give up in the process.

      It may actually have the reverse effect. I have a good income, can easily purchase whatever I want/need and have personally been pretty indifferent to piracy.

      I care helluva lot about personal freedoms though and if the RIAA has any real success in curtailing personal freedoms I may just have to start giving them a hard time. Like many people worldwide already are.

      The RIAA does not have the numbers on their side.

      ---

      New game: Spot the lying astroturfer on /.!

    71. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by Sippan · · Score: 0

      People don't kill people, killers with guns kill people. Pirates with torrent files infringe copyright.

      --
      Frog blast the vent core.
    72. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by Snaller · · Score: 0, Troll

      So your statement is inaccurate.

      No, I don't think it is. Their purpose is to facilitate crime - however, you have found a legal argument that *might* work in court. They could claim that, of course nobody is likely to believe them whey they call themselves "the pirate bay".

      When its in google's cache, they are directly hosting it on their servers- that's a crime, no ambiguity included.

      Indeed no ambiguity, they are innocent. They don't put anything there, it is gathered automatically without intent. Makes all the difference.

      --
      If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
    73. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well done - you've got the stupidest post in the entire story.

      I salute you, Sir Moron!

    74. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by persnowfall.se · · Score: 1

      Correct. Exept that they will probably NOT be charged with violating copyright law, but with assisting in breakting said law. What the prosecutors will have to prove is that, unlike google, TPB had intention in helping people breake the law.

      And here is where the trouble starts. It will be VERY hard for the owners of a website that is called "the pirate bay" to argue that they have no knowlage of piracy and copyright law violation with the help of their site. To make matters worse they published letters from companies asking them to remove copyrighted material. This proves they knew about piracy, did nothing about it and hence where in fact helping people in breaking the law.

      The only real challenge for the police and prosecutors will be finding a specific person that they helped. That is, someone that downloaded copyrighted material using a torrent-file (that the crew of TPB knew was illegal due to copyright infridegement letters they recived) downloaded from TPB. This is what it will boil down to in court.

      This piece of legislation is very new in sweden (2005) and have only been tested a few times, in very unsimular cases. (Two guys where fined for using DC++ to download movies). The outcome is higly uncertain but I tend to beleve that sadly they will be convicted. I'm not an expert in this area but i wouldn't be suprised to find that I'm the only one in this forum that have actually studied law in sweden.

    75. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by dubbreak · · Score: 1

      But torrent sites exist for legit material as well not just copyright infringing. Maybe they are leaned more towards illegit material than a search engine as a percentage, but I bet google has a lot more links to "illegal" material than all the torrent sites combined. Funny thing is with google I can look for an exact filetype (ie just .torrent), so I can use it exclusively to find torrent files, most of which presumeably are "illegal" (copyright laws in your area may vary from mine, as could "fair use" regulations).

      --
      "If you are going through hell, keep going." - Winston Churchill
    76. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by dubbreak · · Score: 1

      Excellent point but the question was hypothetical. Although if the US gov't put all its weight behing stoping torrent sites I have no doubt that they could take down the majority. All it takes is money, political power and "friends" in power (friends can be had via money btw). No, I don't think it will ever happen but don't discount it as impossible (no matter how implausible you think it is).

      --
      "If you are going through hell, keep going." - Winston Churchill
    77. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by dubbreak · · Score: 1

      I wish they could shut down every means to get "stolen" files, that way they could prove themselves wrong. As has been said over and over, they need to change their business model.. however large bodies move slowly and it doesn't seem like it will happen any time soon. There is so much money to be had on selling online at low prices (ie make up in quantity), but instead of implementing highspeed media delivery at low cost (w/o drm) they try to convince everyone that the way they do business is the right way and we should just stick to getting media the way they tell us. The people have already spoken and the movie and music industry wasn't and still isn't listening.

      --
      "If you are going through hell, keep going." - Winston Churchill
    78. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by persnowfall.se · · Score: 1

      As requested...

      NJA 1960:729, (The swedish copyright law)
      NJA 1962:700, 23 kap 2 (about assisting in commiting a crime)
      NJA 2005:359 (Recent addition to the copyright law about computer programs, DRM and other related topics)

    79. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by Dex+Ro · · Score: 1

      I have the answer! Let's get Google to cache all the torrent files!

    80. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by sheimers · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You are wrong: Google carries much of the material in google cache. Only text, but also text is copyrighted.

    81. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by System.out.println() · · Score: 1

      They don't put anything there, it is gathered automatically without intent. Makes all the difference.

      The owners of the Pirate Bay don't post any torrents. Even if they did, the data itself is gathered automatically via the BitTorrent protocol.

      There are arguments to be made that Google caching is more legal than TPB, but that is definitely not one of them.

    82. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by illuminatedwax · · Score: 1

      I realize that it is a more effective way to shut down piracy, but they are dragging down people who are (in my opinion, should be) innocent to do it. My point was that being able to prosecute these people doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

      --
      Did you ever notice that *nix doesn't even cover Linux?
    83. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by rts008 · · Score: 1

      *applause* Very good!

      Info left out of the equation:
      weekend binging on bad burritos and green beer, carpooling to work........"Now, pull my finger."

      Local newscast anchorman: "There was a bizzare accident on the freeway today on the HOV road when a paasenger pulled the driver's finger and the resulting explosion killed all five occupants.

      The investigation revealed that it was all caused by a triggered finger.
      The state's representative in Congress is reported to be drafting a bill outlawing fingers, as obviously they are WMD's and we can't have the terrorists using this on our roadways."

      --
      Down With Slashdot BETA!!! I've been around the corner and seen the oliphant; you can only abuse me from your perspecti
    84. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by LX.onesizebigger · · Score: 1

      Aside from crimes regulated in the criminal code itself (and copyright infringement is not), Brottsbalken 23:4 only applies to crimes with prescribed prison sentences (which is not the case for most copyright infringements). Hence, while it is technically true that Sweden does have a concept similar to contributory infringement (albeit relying on much more general principles of law), in practice, this would seem to have relatively little relevance.

      --
      I for one welcome our new SCOviet Russian overlords to whom all our base are belong.
    85. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But what if Sarah Connor specifically requested to be removed from the phone book, and was not. Then who was at fault?

      Your example is ironic considering that it is impossible to have a phone number from an ILEC in the US and not have your number be publically available to anybody.

    86. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by Snaller · · Score: 0, Troll

      The owners of the Pirate Bay don't post any torrents.

      They host torrents to illegal material, they know so and refuse to do something about it. That makes them culpable.

      There are arguments to be made that Google caching is more legal than TPB,

      I doubt there are arguments to be made that Googles cache is illegal or has anything whatsoever to do with the pirate bay. Their intent appears to be criminal, Googels isn't.

      --
      If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
    87. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by 42forty-two42 · · Score: 1

      Post DHT hashes on usenet. Find peers using kademlia. It's impossible for users of the DHT to filter effectively, so they should (IANAL) not be held liable for distributing peer info (unlike tpb, they don't get the metadata, just the infohash - so they don't know whether a given file is legit or copyright infringement).

    88. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by Vryl · · Score: 2, Insightful

      [have I been trolled?]

      The sole purpose of pirate bay is to facilitate crime

      Yeah. And when it was illegal to strike, the sole purpose of unions was to facilitate crime.

      And when it was illegal to want to run your own country, the sole purpose of Ghandi was to facilitate crime.

      A few more: the sole purpose of the hardware shop down the road is to facilitate crime (they sell crowbars).

      The sole purpose of the cutlery shop at the mall is to facilitate murder.

      Filesharing is not, and should not be regarded as a crime. Sure as the pope shits in the woods, and the bear wears a pointy hat.

    89. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by Lehk228 · · Score: 1

      google CAN be used for illegal things just as a hammer can be used to break in, or to brain someone.

      the difference is while google may link to more illegal files, the vast majority of what google links are legal and the illegal parts are incidental, creaded due to the existance of illegal files on the internet. while a torrent site is USUALLY created to attract and sort illegal files. you can tell google to find .torrent files just as you can tell it to find any other type of file. but it won't sort your torrent files by category and encoding quality.

      --
      Snowden and Manning are heroes.
    90. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by shayne321 · · Score: 1

      They host torrents to illegal material, they know so and refuse to do something about it. That makes them culpable.

      They host text files which list ip addresses. Yes, I'm sure they're aware people use those text files to ultimately end up with files which infringe upon copyright of american corporations, but under Sweedish law this is not illegal. So they are not 'culpable' for anything under the laws of the country in which they live and operate.

      I doubt there are arguments to be made that Googles cache is illegal or has anything whatsoever to do with the pirate bay. Their intent appears to be criminal, Googels isn't.

      Oh please.. So, if I sell you a crow-bar, and tell you it's really effective for breaking into houses, I'm a criminal? But if I sell you a crow-bar and tell you it's really useful for removing nails from lumber, I'm not? Once you bring intent into a legal proceding all logic goes out the window (and yes, I'm aware there are laws such as "hate crime" laws which attempt to quantify the intent of the accused - I think they are useless, too).

      --
      Today I didn't even have to use my AK; I got to say it was a good day -- Icecube
    91. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by scowling · · Score: 1

      They host torrents to illegal material, they know so and refuse to do something about it. That makes them culpable.

      Except, of course, that doing so is not a crime in Sweden. That it is a crime in the US is absolutely irrelevant.

      I doubt there are arguments to be made that Googles cache is illegal

      Copyrighted content being cached and served directly without permission of the copyright holders? Strictly illegal under US law. And unlike TPB, Google is in the US and is therefore subject to US law.

      --
      www.kitchengeek.com -- Nosh for
    92. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm sure there was somekind of age-check-before-download (there has to be a single, cool word in German for that)

      I don't know why you ask, but of course we do have a single word for that. In this context it would be "Altersfreigabe".

      There, makes you crazy, doesn't it?

    93. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by ELProphet · · Score: 1

      age-check-before-download - there has to be a single, cool word in German for that

      vordownladenalterscontrolliere

    94. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by Sigma+7 · · Score: 1
      Incidentally, when's the last time YOU won a game of "whack-a-mole" with an infinite number of levels?


      Let's see...

      In "Whack-a-mole", the optimal condition is to hit every target in a given level. With an infinite number of levels, you have to hit an infinite number of targets...

      However, if you hit the target hard enough, you physically damage the hole or target, thus preventing it from ever rising again. While the arcade game considered you to miss that target subsequently, you have successfully guarenteed that you no longer have to hit that target ever again.

      Now, let's apply this analogy to closing down torrent sites... Hitting a torrent site hard enough to cause collateral damage (e.g. nuclear device) would be the equivalant of causing that hole to cease to exist - and possibly prevent nearby holes from activating.

      In practice, it would still be a tedious task, but there's nothing preventing the players from "finishing" that game.
    95. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by LinuxLuver · · Score: 1

      Pirate Bay no more INTENDED to faciliate crime than an Interstate Highway is intended to provide a getaway route for bank robbers.

      That they CAN be used that way is up to the user.......or highway builders would all be de facto accessories to every crime aided or committed by the existence of highways.

      --
      Only boring people are ever bored.
    96. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by He+Who+Has+No+Name · · Score: 0

      Considering that one of the main stated goals of TPB is defiance of copyright, a better analogy would be somebody who is running a do-it-yourself gunshop out of their garage that has plans and instructions for converting a legal (semi-auto) assault rifle into an (illegal) automatic weapon, and clearly (if implicitly) suggests people do so. Obviously the person that brought the WASR-10 in and converted it into an auto commited a crime, but the guy who provided the machine shop, instructions, supplies and encouragement can't really claim innocence either.

      TPB may only index and distribute legal torrents, but they are vocally doing so for the purpose of violating and defying copyright law. Just look at their page of taunts and immaturity in response to takedown requests. Can you honestly say the copyright violations that occur are just abuse of an intended-to-be-legal service?

    97. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Altersfreigabe" is okay, but "Volljährigkeitsüberprüfung" would be more precise I think. And it has three Umlauts for extra Kraut jiddyness!

    98. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by Snaller · · Score: 0, Troll

      And when it was illegal to strike, the sole purpose of unions was to facilitate crime.


      Nope.

      And when it was illegal to want to run your own country, the sole purpose of Ghandi was to facilitate crime.

      Most certainly not.

      the sole purpose of the hardware shop down the road is to facilitate crime (they sell crowbars).

      Utter nonsense.

      The sole purpose of the cutlery shop at the mall is to facilitate murder.

      Nonsense.
      Filesharing is not, and should not be regarded as a crime.

      Who said anything about filesharing, we were talking about the piratebay.

      --
      If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
    99. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by Vryl · · Score: 1

      The sole purpose of the cutlery shop at the mall is to facilitate murder.

      Nonsense.

      Well, DUH!

      Is there something wrong with your irony meter? Or are you just stupid?

    100. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by Snaller · · Score: 0, Troll

      They host text files which list ip addresses.

      No, torrents are binary files.


      Yes, I'm sure they're aware people use those text files to ultimately end up with files which infringe upon copyright of american corporations, but under Sweedish law this is not illegal.


      I don't believe that.

      So they are not 'culpable' for anything under the laws of the country in which they live and operate.

      That remains to be seen.

      So, if I sell you a crow-bar, and tell you it's really effective for breaking into houses, I'm a criminal?

      It might yes.

      --
      If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
    101. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by Snaller · · Score: 1

      Except, of course, that doing so is not a crime in Sweden.

      Except it is (just wait and see)

      Copyrighted content being cached and served directly without permission of the copyright holders?

      When people put things on the web it is made to be seen by all, unless the take steps to prevent it.

      --
      If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
    102. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by Snaller · · Score: 0, Troll

      Pirate Bay no more INTENDED to faciliate crime than an Interstate Highway is intended to provide a getaway route for bank robbers.

      False.

      That they CAN be used that way is up to the user.......or highway builders would all be de facto accessories to every crime aided or committed by the existence of highways.

      Nonsense.

      --
      If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
    103. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by Snaller · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Is there something wrong with your irony meter? Or are you just stupid?

      What you wrote was stupid, if you want to do stand-up go to a nightclub.

      --
      If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
    104. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by Vryl · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Hrrrm.

      Seems that I am arguing with a teenager, and as such, lessons are in order (serves me right for still reading this site).

      The original statement was of the logical form "The sole purpose of X is Y" where Y was "to facilitate crime".

      For the purposes of ridiculing this, ummmm, ridiculous statement, I replaced X with various other things, to give some indication of the foolishness of such absolutism in statements. You *did* notice this, didn't you?

      Pirate Bay has various purposes, some of the monetary, some of them political. Your original statement was worthless, poorly thought thru, and easily demolished. I chose to treat it with the contempt it deserved.

      You seem to have missed my deliberately stupid finisher: Sure as the pope shits in the woods, and the bear wears a pointy hat.

      This may have given someone more clueful than thou some indication to my intent, as I was worried that your original post was so ridiculous that I was being the victim of a troll, and chose to be playful.

      I thought that you were a troll, but now I know for sure that you are fuckwit. C'est la vie...

    105. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by Snaller · · Score: 0, Troll

      Seems that I am arguing with a teenager,

      Funny, that is what i was thinking.

      The original statement was of the logical form "The sole purpose of X is Y" where Y was "to facilitate crime".

      For the purposes of ridiculing this, ummmm, ridiculous statement, I replaced X with various other things, to give some indication of the foolishness of such absolutism in statements. You *did* notice this, didn't you?


      Yes I did - but my original statement was true, yours was just nonsense.
      The sole reason for the pirate bay is to share stuff which is illegal, trying to suggest otherwise is just nonsense. That's not to say there might not be a legal loophole, but nobody (adult) is going to believe otherwise.

      Pirate Bay has various purposes,

      No, it doesn't seem so.

      some of the monetary,

      Yes, to raise money for themselves. Noble goal *g*

      some of them political.

      No, it has nothing to do with the political "pirate party" expect perhaps in some views.

      Your original statement was worthless, poorly thought thru, and easily demolished.

      Except you failed to "demolish" anything.

      I chose to treat it with the contempt it deserved.

      And thereby failed to prove anything.

      You seem to have missed my deliberately stupid finisher: Sure as the pope shits in the woods, and the bear wears a pointy hat.

      This may have given someone more clueful than thou some indication to my intent, as I was worried that your original post was so ridiculous that I was being the victim of a troll, and chose to be playful.


      Well, forgive me, I'm not quite up on redneck vernacular.

      I thought that you were a troll, but now I know for sure that you are fuckwit.

      Ah yes, the last resort of the argument less: abuse.

      --
      If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
    106. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by Vryl · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Fuck me, are you deadly stupid. Stay away from machinery, fire, water, steep surfaces and anything else that requires a modicum of commonsense in order to avoid serious injury. Don't drive motorcars, think of the children!

      Anyway, I finally summoned up enough courage to wade thru your badly formatted post to the end, and found two out and out contradictions.

      Are you a silly boy, or what?

      Starting from your dumb original post, you said: "The sole purpose of pirate bay is to facilitate crime"

      NOW, in reply to my "Pirate Bay has various purposes, some of the monetary" you say: "Yes, to raise money for themselves. Noble goal *g*".

      That makes 2 purposes, in your book. Facilitating crime AND making money. What was your point again?

      You dickhead. [as an aside, the nobility or otherwise of the purpose has nothing to do with it's "non-soleness", if you get my drift]

      And then you say "It has nothing to do with the Pirate Party, except that it does". Wtf?

      Well, forgive me, I'm not quite up on redneck vernacular.

      Or logic, it seems.

    107. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's like saying memories and talking about the details in the movie are illegal because you wouldn't have memories and couldn't talk about the movie events without seeing the movie.

      BTW, more than one movie can have the same hash, in theory, so it's even less-specific than a memory in someone's head.

    108. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Obviously all laundromats should change their names to something else because money laundering MIGHT be going on their premises. Heck it should be legal to make them all go out of business because of their name!

      Sheep, I think your FOX news is on...

    109. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by Thundersnatch · · Score: 1

      Traditional "fair use" doctrine, which protects the right of libararies to create things like card catalogs, or allows them to make microfilm copies for indexing and archival purposes. Google serves as a mostly indiscriminate "card catalog" for the Internet. The problem is, as soon as Google starts discriminating about what they index (other than by following robots.txt directions), they open themselves up to having to comply with a million different laws from a million different communites and nations. Google already started down this slippery slope with the Chinese.

    110. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by Elektroschock · · Score: 1

      Infringement != crime

    111. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by Prof.Phreak · · Score: 1

      That's like saying memories and talking about the details in the movie are illegal because you wouldn't have memories and couldn't talk about the movie events without seeing the movie.

      Ok. Lossy compression. At what point does it become "non-derived"?

      Take the whole movie. Compress with lossy compression to remove 1 bit from it. Is it still derived work? Yes, no? Repeat that many billions of times, and you get to... a hash. At what point is it not a derived work?

      --

      "If anything can go wrong, it will." - Murphy

    112. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nice try yourself. There is an exception - granted, a very ill-defined, not well understood exception - in ALL United States copyright law for something called 'Fair Use'.

      That 'technicality' is what makes it legal for you to rip your CDs to .mp3s, copy a song for a friend, and watch a movie on TiVo, VHS, or DVD. (Remember the Betamax case? It was a Fair Use issue!)

      All of these things are explicitly allowed in the U.S. because of the Fair Use doctrine, even though in each instance it is very much "copying material that is subject to copyright without permission" as you so blithely put it.

      Get your facts straight before you post that shit here.

    113. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by Anonymous+Brave+Guy · · Score: 1
      There is an exception - granted, a very ill-defined, not well understood exception - in ALL United States copyright law for something called 'Fair Use'.

      Thank you. I'm also aware that 2+2=4 and that water is wet.

      All of these things are explicitly allowed in the U.S. because of the Fair Use doctrine, even though in each instance it is very much "copying material that is subject to copyright without permission" as you so blithely put it.

      They aren't explicitly allowed, they're implicitly allowed because they've been held to meet the four criteria for fair use. There has been, to my knowledge, no similarly broad ruling on the subject of caching as Google applies it. The only case so far seems to be Field, and you can read the commentary on why any precedents that set are very limited.

      --
      If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
    114. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by Anonymous+Brave+Guy · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure the library uses you mention are a suitable analogy for Google Cache. (The Google search engine itself is a different matter.)

      For a start, libraries are public facilities (at least in my country; perhaps others differ) and subject to specific exemptions in some cases (same caveat applies). Google, OTOH, is a commercial organisation.

      Moreover, Google Cache directly reproduces the original content (aside from the bandwidth theft for images thing). I don't think the library equivalent is setting up microfiche copies for archival; it's more like setting up a printing press and printing duplicates of all books in the library that are then given away for free to all comers.

      I agree with your point about discrimination as well, FWIW. IMHO, you can either be a common carrier (or whatever the local equivalent is) providing a completely impartial service, or be a publisher/editor/other discriminatory body with some level of responsibility for the content you approve, but the law should not allow you the reasonable protections afforded to common carriers if you don't act like one.

      --
      If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
    115. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by Vryl · · Score: 1

      Snaller, like, I really hate you now, which is sad.

      But, dood... ummm... WHY THE FUCK ARE YOU SUCH A TWAT THAT YOU JUST POST "FALSE" AND "NONSENSE" AND THINK THAT IT MAKES A POINT!

      I hate you as much as I hate those tards who type in all caps.

    116. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by Anonymous+Brave+Guy · · Score: 1

      BTW, since when was copying a song for a friend fair use?

      --
      If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
    117. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by hotspotbloc · · Score: 1
      I don't know why you ask

      Because the German language is the best language I've ever studied (but the only Slavic language studied) and IMO for engineering. I wonder if the ability to have incredibly descriptive single words might correlate with their engineering and scientific advances. Because one word is more efficient than a group, something unique to the "West".

      Besides, it's cool language. Oh, someone once told me that Worf sounds better in German than English. =)

      --
      "I hate to advocate drugs, alcohol, violence or insanity but they've always worked for me" - HST
    118. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by raduf · · Score: 2, Insightful


      Incidentally, when's the last time YOU won a game of "whack-a-mole" with an infinite number of levels?

          Everybody's very hyper about how they shut down one site and a dozen pop-up. It's not as simple. With each site closed they close a whole class of sites. With napster, they closed all us sites operating on the same principle, present or future. With the pirate bay, they'll close all swedesh sites. There is a limited number of countries (150-180), most of which are unsuitable for various reasons. If they eliminate Sweden, they probably also eliminate several european countries with similar legislation in which nobody will dare make such a site again. And so on.
          So no, there's a very limited number of levels and decreasing every day. The solution will probably come from new generation p2p software, better, faster and more efficient. But then the battle will get a lot dirtier, with countries (US) banning open source software and going for individual users and lots and lots of pollution-oriented attacks. There is a war all right and the party with the more determination and resources will win. The outcome is by no means predetermined.
          Maybe the solution will be a p2p software with guarranteed anonimity which is so obviously usefull that nobody will dare go against it, legally or otherwise. But this is the very definition of early internet... and things rarely go back to what they were.

    119. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by cduffy · · Score: 1
      Infringement != crime
      Formerly, in the US, copyright infringement was only a civil offense. This is no longer true.
    120. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by Eternauta3k · · Score: 0

      You evidently don't get recursive irony.

      --
      Yeah. Would you choose a neurosurgeon who pokes around people's brains in his spare time? I wouldn't.
    121. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by Snaller · · Score: 1

      "And when it was illegal to strike, the sole purpose of unions was to facilitate crime."

      Nope.

      "And when it was illegal to want to run your own country, the sole purpose of Ghandi was to facilitate crime. "

      Most certainly not.

      "the sole purpose of the hardware shop down the road is to facilitate crime (they sell crowbars). "

      Utter nonsense.

      "The sole purpose of the cutlery shop at the mall is to facilitate murder. "

      Nonsense.

      "Filesharing is not, and should not be regarded as a crime. "

      Who said anything about filesharing, we were talking about the piratebay.

      --
      If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
    122. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by Snaller · · Score: 1

      "Seems that I am arguing with a teenager, "

      Funny, that is what i was thinking.

      "The original statement was of the logical form "The sole purpose of X is Y" where Y was "to facilitate crime".

      For the purposes of ridiculing this, ummmm, ridiculous statement, I replaced X with various other things, to give some indication of the foolishness of such absolutism in statements. You *did* notice this, didn't you?"

      Yes I did - but my original statement was true, yours was just nonsense.

      The sole reason for the pirate bay is to share stuff which is illegal, trying to suggest otherwise is just nonsense. That's not to say there might not be a legal loophole, but nobody (adult) is going to believe otherwise.

      "Pirate Bay has various purposes, "

      No, it doesn't seem so.

      "some of the monetary, "

      Yes, to raise money for themselves. Noble goal *g*

      "some of them political. "

      No, it has nothing to do with the political "pirate party" expect perhaps in some views.

      "Your original statement was worthless, poorly thought thru, and easily demolished. "

      Except you failed to "demolish" anything.

      "I chose to treat it with the contempt it deserved. "

      And thereby failed to prove anything.

      "You seem to have missed my deliberately stupid finisher: Sure as the pope shits in the woods, and the bear wears a pointy hat.

      This may have given someone more clueful than thou some indication to my intent, as I was worried that your original post was so ridiculous that I was being the victim of a troll, and chose to be playful. "

      Well, forgive me, I'm not quite up on redneck vernacular.

      "I thought that you were a troll, but now I know for sure that you are fuckwit. "

      Ah yes, the last resort of the argumentless: abuse.
      (and of course on slashdot, they can get their script kiddie friends to mod other people down)

      --
      If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
    123. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by LinuxLuver · · Score: 1

      I've already made it clear I don't agree - and for the reasons given.

      So simply restating erroneous assertions doesn't advance your argument in any way.

      --
      Only boring people are ever bored.
    124. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by Snaller · · Score: 1

      I've already made it clear I don't agree - and for the reasons given.

      Yes, I heard your opnion and does not agree.


      So simply restating erroneous assertions doesn't advance your argument in any way.


      You are the one stating erroneous assertions - it is a fact to the world that Google is not in it for crime, the pirates are - if you know otherwise you could have proven it.

      If its just different opniones and we have different ones why do you continue to repeat them?

      --
      If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
    125. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by Thundersnatch · · Score: 1
      For a start, libraries are public facilities (at least in my country; perhaps others differ) and subject to specific exemptions in some cases (same caveat applies). Google, OTOH, is a commercial organisation.

      There are many private University and even non-academic private/corporate libraries to which the same fair use doctrine applies in the USA.

      Google cache is really an archival snapshot of the web, much like the archive.org. It is fair use in that it reproduces what is publicly available in any case, but Google adds higher availability and searchability. The orgininal source is duly credited. It's much like a library saving the most recent issues of a newspaper, or the "news clipping" services that are often provided to Congress.

      Anyway, I'm sure Google's lawyers understand the legal implications of their caching service far better than you and I, and yet they have not advised Google to take it down.

    126. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by iowannaski · · Score: 1

      Libraries are public facilities? Most, perhaps, but any list of the world's biggest libraries is littered with private libraries (hint: the biggest of these are located in Cambridge, Massachustts).

      --
      i forget
    127. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by Yakman · · Score: 1

      Because the German language is the best language I've ever studied (but the only Slavic language studied)

      AFAIK German is a Germanic language, just like English.

    128. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by Anonymous+Brave+Guy · · Score: 1
      Google cache is really an archival snapshot of the web, much like the archive.org. It is fair use in that it reproduces what is publicly available in any case, but Google adds higher availability and searchability.

      I'm not sure why you assume that just because they're Google, they're automatically in the right (and legally so).

      Last time I checked, they didn't actually reproduce what is publicly available in any case. They reproduced the text, and committed a gross breach of netiquette in referring back to the original site for images rather than caching those as well. The higher availability thing is questionable; I'm not aware of any time since it was set up that the site I run has been off-line, for example, and I've received no reports of unreachability for particular visitors. I don't see why Google's cache offers any better searchability than the original site, either.

      And this is still ducking the big, and as yet unresolved AFAIK, question of whether either Google Cache or the Wayback Machine are even close to legal, given that they duplicate entire works without permission, and it's certainly not a black-and-white case of fair use.

      Anyway, I'm sure Google's lawyers understand the legal implications of their caching service far better than you and I, and yet they have not advised Google to take it down.

      Who knows what they've advised Google and why? For all we know, they may have advised Google that the service is flagrantly violating copyright law, but that the likely costs of any court action are relatively small. Corporations push the boundaries of what's legal all the time if it will make them more money, until someone gets pissed off seriously enough to file a suit and stop them.

      --
      If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
    129. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by dekaysion · · Score: 1

      Altersnachweis?

    130. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by hotspotbloc · · Score: 1

      Yes, it is Germanic. I guess I was referring to parts of it's roots not strongly shared with romance languages. The parts that make it different from other Western European tongues.

      --
      "I hate to advocate drugs, alcohol, violence or insanity but they've always worked for me" - HST
    131. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by tinkerghost · · Score: 1

      What the prosecutors will have to prove is that, unlike google, TPB had intention in helping people breake the law.
      Ohh so sorry, you need to have a law reguarding 'facilitating' copywrite violations.
      Sweden doesn't have one. That's why it's legal.
      In the US, I can legally publish a book reguarding the how & why of assasination tactics, and it's been upheld, I am not responsible for the actions of those people who buy the book.
      Face it up until the DCMA, diseminating information was not a crime unless it involved government classified information - spilling trade secrets was a contract violation at best - civil law. So, it's only in the last 8 years that anything reguarding copyrights has been a crime - up until then it was a civil offence - which it should still be.

    132. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by tinkerghost · · Score: 1

      That would be that it's been declared fair use by the courts. The cache is a technical implimentation to improve the performance of the system as a whole - it is not designed as a permanent copy of the data. Otherwise you would be seeing that view offline feature on IE disapearing in an explosion of legal venom.

    133. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by Anonymous+Brave+Guy · · Score: 1

      What Google calls a Cache, and the prior usage of the term in the IT community that was ruled fair use by US courts, are entirely different things. Google's Cache isn't a technical necessity, or part of the way the Internet works. It's a direct but sometimes incomplete copy of others' material, made without permission, and redistributed on an independent web site, which happens to use the word "Cache" in the page title for marketing purposes.

      --
      If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
    134. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by persnowfall.se · · Score: 1

      Ohh so sorry, you need to have a law reguarding 'facilitating' copywrite violations. Sweden doesn't have one. That's why it's legal.

      Unfortunatly we do. Since copyright violation can result in a prison sentence (SFS 1960:729 53 par.), you can also be responsible for assisting in breaking copyright law (SFS 1962:700 (Brottsbalken) 23 kap, 4 par.)

      I wish I was wrong, but sadly thats not the case...

    135. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by Binkleyz · · Score: 1

      Why in the world would anyone, much less a reader of /. , use MSIE for anything?

    136. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by scowling · · Score: 1

      Except it is (just wait and see)

      Except it isn't. This has been explained to you countles times, and there's ample evidence in this thread and elsewhere. Your interpretation of how the world works is an irrelevant fantasy.

      When people put things on the web it is made to be seen by all, unless the take steps to prevent it.

      It is unsurprising that your knowledge of copyright law is fucking retarded, too. Putting stuff on the web does not place it in the public domain by default, you moron.

      --
      www.kitchengeek.com -- Nosh for
    137. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by idonthack · · Score: 1

      It's like a car dealer selling cars that have legitimate uses but work really well for pirating software.

      --
      Why is it that when you believe something it's an opinion, but when I believe something it's a manifesto?
    138. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by 1110110001 · · Score: 1

      I'm from Austria, so I can only guess - but even Krauts wouldn't use such a complicated word as Volljährigkeitsüberprüfung - it would be (Über-)Prüfung auf/der Volljährigkeit. You can read more about http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Altersfreigabe, which is really used.

    139. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... by Snaller · · Score: 1

      Except it isn't. This has been explained to you countles times,

      No. It hasn't been explained even ONCE - a bunch of hysterical badly behaved children have been yelling their opinion all the time. This is not explaning, this is not documenting, that is just nonsense. When the fact is nobody knows how the courts would rule, many lawers say it most likely IS illegal. Sweden changed their implementation of the copyright laws just last year, and their law in general doesn't allow for people to help others comit crime.

      And what the hell kind of gutter were you born in! Calling me moron and making up stuff i never wrote! Grow the hell up and learn to talk politely to your elders!

      EOD

      --
      If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
  3. The Top ten by yoharryo · · Score: 5, Funny

    Nice to see an illegal copy of Vista is number one...

    1. Re:The Top ten by Ford+Prefect · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Nice to see an illegal copy of Vista is number one...

      Quiet, you - it's not criminally illegal, it's rightcopy defringement, or something like that. Yeah. It's in Sweden, and they're pirates, so that makes it absolutely all right. The fact that Sweden's got some odd legal loophole which makes it not a crime to post links to copyrighted material means that it's therefore absolutely not a crime to go ahead and download any of this copyrighted material, laws in the users' native countries be damned. Swedish pirates say what they're doing is fine, so therefore everything else they facilitate is too!

      Erm...

      Isn't actually downloading anything from such sites still illegal?

      I pay for stuff, or do without. It has its advantages, especially with games... ;-)

      * prances around in free Half-Life 2 T-shirt *

      --
      Tedious Bloggy Stuff - hooray?
    2. Re:The Top ten by popeguilty · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The fact that it's illegal for us to accept doesn't make it illegal for them to offer.

      Also, Minerva chapter 2 is out? Hot damn! *gets to downloading... legally, of course, since it's free. And shiny.*

    3. Re:The Top ten by Legion303 · · Score: 5, Funny

      "* prances around in free Half-Life 2 T-shirt *"

      Looking at it from another angle, you paid $40 for a shirt. :)

    4. Re:The Top ten by Blue+Stone · · Score: 4, Funny
      Berrating a supporter of copyright infringement: $0.02
      Bragging about paying for Half-Life 2: $35.00

      Claiming that a bundled t-shirt is free: er ... priceless.

      For everything else, there's Pirate Bay.

      :-)

      --
      Corporation, n. An ingenious device for obtaining individual profit without individual responsibility. - Ambrose Bierce
    5. Re:The Top ten by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Was it free or did you have to buy the game? $60 for a shiny aluminium covered plastic disc and a t-shirt? Maybe some paper for good measure.

    6. Re:The Top ten by Ford+Prefect · · Score: 1

      Claiming that a bundled t-shirt is free: er ... priceless.

      Nope, it wasn't bundled - it was free.

      Although I did have to pay to get to the airport.

      --
      Tedious Bloggy Stuff - hooray?
    7. Re:The Top ten by ClamIAm · · Score: 1
      * prances around in free Half-Life 2 T-shirt *

      Yeah, just like this "free" copy of Windows that came with my PC...

    8. Re:The Top ten by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      * prances around in free Half-Life 2 T-shirt *
      I've always wondered what kind of retard pays a company to become a walking advertisement for them. If they want me to wear their shirt, the least they could do is provide a free copy of the game to compensate me.
    9. Re:The Top ten by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Isn't actually downloading anything from such sites still illegal?

      No. Aren't you paying attention? There is nothing illegal on the Pirate Bay servers. The only illegal thing that you could do with the actual files offered by the Pirate Bay is to distribute them in a country which has outlawed the distribution of metadata which can be used to facilitate illegal copying. Since that is not the case in Sweden, the Pirate Bay can legally distribute the files, and you can most likely download them legally, because there's a difference between having such files and distributing them. If you were to actually use the information to get an illegal copy of the software/movie/music/etc, then that could land you in hot water for the separate act of making an unauthorized copy of copyrighted data, but that's not the Pirate Bay's concern. So no, downloading from the Pirate Bay is most likely not illegal where you are, even outside Sweden.

    10. Re:The Top ten by EvilIdler · · Score: 2, Informative

      $40 for a shirt that might attract unwanted attention, even :)
      (Google for uses of the lambda symbol ;)

    11. Re:The Top ten by MasaMuneCyrus · · Score: 2, Insightful

      And #2 is X-Men 3.

      WHY someone would ever want to download a movie is beyond me. They're alwasy worse quality (especially so before the DVD comes out), and plus, movie theaters (while they may charge too much for food) always have nice air conditioning, excellent sound, a huge screen, and depending on which one you go to, comfy seats.

    12. Re:The Top ten by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just because it says "in theaters everywhere" doesn't mean it necessarily is. Some people download cams because that's the only way they can see the movie.

    13. Re:The Top ten by TechnologyX · · Score: -1

      At least he isn't a lame faggot that thinks everything should be for free.

      I blame the OSS fag 'revolution' for most of the piracy. You zit faced shitfucks think everything should be free, since you're too stupid to make money off your shitty sourceforge project.

      --
      Slashdot sucks
    14. Re:The Top ten by LaurenBC · · Score: 1

      I've downloaded them on occasion because of my intense aversion to human beings. I'm sure there are plenty of 'legitimate' reasons to download bootlegged movies, just offering mine up.

      --
      I don't need this, I've got a Master's Degree in folklore and mythology!
    15. Re:The Top ten by Mouse42 · · Score: 1

      I would suspect that these are the motivations for downloading movies before DVDs come out for sale:

      - Rising prices that has started to price people out of watching "questionable" movies. $10 is too much if you don't know if it's going to be good. And *forget it* being affordable if you want to bring your children. $40 for a family of four with two little kids not understanding why popcorn and soda is too expensive.

      - New releases are notoriously unrentable as there is too low a supply.

      - People want to watch a good movie again. They paid their $10 to see it in the theater, and then want to watch it another 3 times (which I expect is very true for X-men 3)

    16. Re:The Top ten by ericdano · · Score: 1

      Yeah. The Jabba the huts of the world are singing praises to the Pirate Bay today. They don't need to leave their chairs, and can keep the infusion of Pepsi and cheezypoofs coming.

      --
      It's either on the beat or off the beat, it's that easy.
      I moderate therefore I rule!
      --
    17. Re:The Top ten by suv4x4 · · Score: 1

      WHY someone would ever want to download a movie is beyond me. They're alwasy worse quality (especially so before the DVD comes out), and plus, movie theaters (while they may charge too much for food) always have nice air conditioning, excellent sound, a huge screen, and depending on which one you go to, comfy seats.

      Well over here cinemas are crappy, and don't project the movies I want to see.
      I either get it from P2P, hope the DVD arrives in 7-8 months (good chance it won't, ever), or just give up on it.

      I go for P2P. Then those clowns call it an actual sale loss. Idiots.

    18. Re:The Top ten by Tweekster · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Have you ever considered that it isnt a loophole and just the way the law is supposed to be. They have known about it for a long time, if it were a loophole it would have been "fixed" maybe that country wants it to be that way.

      Kind of like Russia and allofmp3.com. Maybe the Russian legislature just wants the law to work that way, they have had ample time and obviously been pressured to fix it, yet have not.

      And btw, downloading stuff might very well be illegal for you, but the internet is a global network, which means laws of one country do not apply everywhere, yes yes, I know this is a difficult concept to grasp but it is true.

      BTW, i wouldnt be proud if I were wearing a half life 2 tshirt.

      --
      The phrase "more better" is acceptable English. suck it grammar Nazis
    19. Re:The Top ten by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In short, he paid $40 to ensure not getting laid ;-)

    20. Re:The Top ten by ElleyKitten · · Score: 1, Insightful

      I hate seeing movies in theaters. Sticky floors, cramped seats, people talking, people standing up in front of you, stupid "please don't pirate this movie" ads (uh, obviously I didn't prirate this movie since I'm here). I have air conditioning at home, I don't need to go to the theater for that.

      Downloaded movies usually have pretty decent quality, and I've got a nice monitor and a computer chair more comfortable than any chairs I've seen in theaters (I also have a computer by my bed if I want to stretch out while watching) so I really prefer watching from home rather than go out.

      It's not that I'm a cheapskate, it's just that downloading is just so much more convienent. In fact, most of what I download I could legally watch for free, because it's broadcast TV shows (Veronica Mars, Lost, etc), I just find it easier to find it on Pirate Bay or IsoHunt than remember to set the VCR. ABC appearently has it's shows online, but they use Flash 8 which isn't available for Linux so I can't watch on their site. iTunes is another option for watching legit movies/tv shows, but they're not for Linux either. So, until I find legit options for watching videos (that doesn't involve waiting a year for the DVD to come out - which technically isn't legit anyways since I don't have liscensed DVD players on my computers) I'll be sticking to the illegal options.

      --
      "What is Internet Explorer 7? Are you saying we can't access the normal internet?" - I love tech support. Really.
    21. Re:The Top ten by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      WHY someone would ever want to download a movie is beyond me.

      I find your lack of imagination disturbing. Why would someone ever want to watch a VHS? Or a DVD?

      movie theaters (while they may charge too much for food) always have nice air conditioning, excellent sound, a huge screen, and depending on which one you go to, comfy seats.

      It's amusing to note that you think the only variable in movie theaters is the seating. But that suggests an explanation for why you can't conceive of downloading a movie: you have no furniture.

    22. Re:The Top ten by Surt · · Score: 3, Funny

      Given that he was prancing around in it, I'd have to guess the attention would not be unwanted.

      --
      "Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking
    23. Re:The Top ten by Surt · · Score: 1

      All of the theatres near me, unfortunately, have uncomfy, sticky seats, staticy and overloud sound (with the volume pushing the speakers into distortion), big but flawed screens, and noise in the picture due to film decay unless you see a film opening week, and air conditioning that rivals my home. I've tried all the theaters within a 20 mile radius.

      --
      "Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking
    24. Re:The Top ten by Surt · · Score: 1

      stupid "please don't pirate this movie" ads (uh, obviously I didn't prirate this movie since I'm here)

      I'm pretty sure those ads are designed to encourage you to form a mob and beat up the guy with the camcorder sitting next to you.

      --
      "Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking
    25. Re:The Top ten by octopus72 · · Score: 1

      Because they are kids which do not, nor do their parents earn thousands of dollars pe month.
      You have to notice that there are lots of people outside of the USA or EU, some even owning their poverty to those rich western countries.

    26. Re:The Top ten by RobertLTux · · Score: 1

      you do know that if the theature is THX certified then you can report bad sound
      (hint if the last 0.2 seconds of the THX logo cause the speakers to buzz then its to loud)

      --
      Any person using FTFY or editing my postings agrees to a US$50.00 charge
    27. Re:The Top ten by yoharryo · · Score: 1

      They tell you to love the movie experience, which you loose when you download. They forget one thing... the experience sucks.

    28. Re:The Top ten by Osty · · Score: 1

      WHY someone would ever want to download a movie is beyond me. They're alwasy worse quality (especially so before the DVD comes out), and plus, movie theaters (while they may charge too much for food) always have nice air conditioning, excellent sound, a huge screen, and depending on which one you go to, comfy seats.

      I don't download movies, but I do rent DVDs (and occassionally buy, but that's very rare). Why do I do that rather than go to the movie theater? Well, others have covered the price angle and the sticky floor angle and the annoying viewers angle. Mine is that I have a better home setup than a theater. I should probably qualify that -- the system is better for a single person sitting 6-8 feet in front of the TV, in the "sweet spot" for the sound system. If I tried to cater to hundreds of people, of course my setup would be inferior. That doesn't matter, though, because I have a target audience of one -- me.

      Oh, and it's not just me who'd rather watch movies on his home theater. As HDTV adoption grows, more and more people are choosing to skip the overpriced, uncomfortable theaters and watch the movies at home. Why do you think the DVD release delay of a movie is getting shorter and shorter? It used to be that you wouldn't find the movie on DVD for a year or more after its theatrical release. Now you can sometimes find it (legally) in as little as a month. There's even been talk of simultaneous theater/DVD/Pay-per-view movie releases.

      The movie theater will, eventually, go the way of the video game arcade. Most people will watch their movies at home. A few small theaters will stay afloat playing to nostalgia or "fancy" techniques you can't easily get at home. Finally, you'll have just a few specialty theaters (IMAX) who won't be affected at all because they're not in the same game as "Hollywood" theaters. Personally, I'm okay with that.

    29. Re:The Top ten by nolife · · Score: 1

      I can spend 5-10 hours ripping and encoding a movie that might not look too bad after tweaking the encoding or I can download the same thing in 30 minutes and the quality is often much better then my own rip. Why do I want rips of my DVDs? Because I have a generic media center PC attached to my entertainment center and one of the functions it provides is the ability to click a few buttons and watch any one of my movies. I download some television shows as well but most I record myself with that same PC. For my audio files, ripping myself is easier and not as time consuming as the movies and I have a much better chance of getting better quality myself because I encode in flac.

      --
      Bad boys rape our young girls but Violet gives willingly.
    30. Re:The Top ten by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't think everything should be free, just the stuff I can easily steal.

    31. Re:The Top ten by mrogers · · Score: 1
      Isn't actually downloading anything from such sites still illegal?

      As far as I know the question's never been settled by a court, but there seems to be a general consensus that the uploader creates a copy (which is illegal) whereas the downloader just receives a copy (which is not).

      The pro-copyright side doesn't want to point out that both users' computers and every router in between make copies of the data, because that would make their 'copying equals theft' position look absurd. The anti-copyright side doesn't want to point out that the downloader initiates the transfer, because that could bring a flood of new lawsuits against downloaders. So for the moment the consensus that the uploader makes the copy seems to be holding...

    32. Re:The Top ten by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and then want to watch it another 3 times (which I expect is very true for X-men 3)

      I expected that too, but was sadly mistaken.

    33. Re:The Top ten by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nice to see an illegal copy of Vista is number one...

      They're essentially public betas with no copy protection, MS knew full well they would be "leaked" from the test group and used more widely since that has happened with every OS before. It helps build hype and is basically free viral marketing. I have a beta of Chicago (windows 95) on a huge number of floppies, and I definetely wasn't in the MS approved test group :)

    34. Re:The Top ten by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They tell you to love the movie experience, which you loose when you download. They forget one thing... the experience sucks.

      "lose"

    35. Re:The Top ten by idonthack · · Score: 1

      Don't forget the little book of game artwork. And the shiny box.

      And I think it was $60 when it came out.

      --
      Why is it that when you believe something it's an opinion, but when I believe something it's a manifesto?
    36. Re:The Top ten by Pofy · · Score: 1

      >The pro-copyright side doesn't want to point out that both users' computers and every router in
      >between make copies of the data, because that would make their 'copying equals theft' position
      >look absurd. The anti-copyright side doesn't want to point out that the downloader initiates the
      >transfer, because that could bring a flood of new lawsuits against downloaders. So for the
      >moment the consensus that the uploader makes the copy seems to be holding...

      Actually, it has been discussed and handled in previous cases here in Sweden. The downloader is the one copying and the one doing all the acts that create a copy. Whos coputer that physically might make the copy is in that respect irrelevant. The uploader on the other hand makes the work available to the public, which in itself is often an infringement. The loop hole in Swedish copyright laws up until last year was that copies made for personal use are not infrigning, hence, downloading for personal use was basically ok (it was never tried in court specifcally though). The new law from last year, makes coppies being made from an "original" (original of the copy, not nessecarilly the complete original from the copyright holder) must be made available in a non infringing way. That basically means that most such downloads became infringing.

      As for copies along the way, those have never been considered infringing by Swedish copyright law and with the rewriting of the law, have specific exception of infringement (before they didn't have specific iexception but back then, such temporary (and other similar) copies was not considered copies to start with.

    37. Re:The Top ten by mrogers · · Score: 1

      Thanks for the info, it's interesting to see different countries' perspectives on this issue. The recent EU copyright directive also contains an exception for copies made "for the sole purpose of enabling ... efficient transmission in a network between third parties by an intermediary".

  4. Political campaign for the Piracy Party by paugq · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Looks like the Swedish Police is making a free, wide and very positive campaign to favor the Piracy Party. I bet they will be getting a lot more votes thanks to this weird operation. Thank you Swedish police officers!

    1. Re:Political campaign for the Piracy Party by Xymor · · Score: 1

      TPB is setting up servers in various countries. Netherlands and Sweden are the frist 2. This exposure may get a lot of votes for Piratbyrån.

    2. Re:Political campaign for the Piracy Party by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      You can't vote for Piratbyrån, they are not running. You can vote for Piratpartiet, and you should!

    3. Re:Political campaign for the Piracy Party by Husgaard · · Score: 4, Interesting
      Yes, their member count has almost doubled. And for the last few day they have gotten about 1000 new members each day.

      With the kind of support this incident has raised, they are now likely to enter the swedish parliament in the elections in september.

      Although (still) officially denied, it looks like TPB was raided on the direct order of the swedish Minister of Justice, Thomas Bodström, after pressure from MPAA and the US government. This is highly illegal in Sweden, and the leader of the opposition in the swedish parliament has requested an investigation.

    4. Re:Political campaign for the Piracy Party by Kjella · · Score: 3, Interesting

      With the kind of support this incident has raised, they are now likely to enter the swedish parliament in the elections in september.

      Any word on how they're doing in the polls? I've just looked at the member stats, which are sort of an open issue, because the smallest party in parlament (Green Party, 247000 votes) just over the 4% margin (225000 votes) has about 7200 members, the pirate party only 5000. The ratio of votes to members seem to vary greatly though, but the Green Party is in the good end. E.g. the central party has 50-80000 members (depending on how you count) and 350000 votes. Since the number is growing so rapidly it's hard to tell, but I wouldn't say "likely" just yet. Then again, this might be the sort of party not that many "publicly" become members for but could vote for on election day. I really wonder what'll happen in september...

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    5. Re:Political campaign for the Piracy Party by jez9999 · · Score: 1

      Any idea why Piratpartiet is called that? It's a pretty strange name calling yourself the Piracy Party as it sounds like you 100% endorse all piracy, especially when they don't actually want to abolish copyright, just reduce it to 5 years.

    6. Re:Political campaign for the Piracy Party by cgenman · · Score: 1

      Yes. It's a dark day for the Ninja Party.

    7. Re:Political campaign for the Piracy Party by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're right about the US connection. That was reported by both Rapport and SvD and there are hardly more reliable and cautious news agencies anywhere. If they say it's so, then it is so. Count on it. If it is not, count on them being the first to tell you.

      They're both that good.

    8. Re:Political campaign for the Piracy Party by Magnus+Reftel · · Score: 1
      Any word on how they're doing in the polls?
      3.1% among male first-time voters accodring to TEMO. That poll was made before the police raid, though.
      --
      print "Yet another p{erl,ython} hacker\n",
    9. Re:Political campaign for the Piracy Party by Atuin+the+Great · · Score: 1

      It's not the 'piracy party', but 'the Pirate party'.

  5. Investigators liability? by LinuxGeek · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So, at what point does it become the responsibility of the police to do enough homework to make sure that their investigation dosen't harm many other businesses that are completely uninvolved in the search for evidence? What recourse do the other effected isp customers have?

    --

    Kindness is the language which the deaf can hear and the blind can see. - Mark Twain
    1. Re:Investigators liability? by popeguilty · · Score: 0

      Responsibility? Police?

      Mod parent up funny. This guy's a comedic genius!

    2. Re:Investigators liability? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

      Never and none?
      Comeon, police officers can generally murder people without consequences, if you actually file a suit for a little lost income any prosecutor is only going to laugh it away.

    3. Re:Investigators liability? by Depili · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Remember that this is Sweden, not USA we talking about, in here the police doesn't have any more leeway when it comes to laws than normal citicens. (Ever so often we get to read about wich high up police officer got how big traffic tickets etc [the fines are based on income rather than being a fixed sum]).

      So please try to remember that not every contry works the same as America (and I'm really happy that it's so, frankly America and the American mentality scares me.)

    4. Re:Investigators liability? by Kjella · · Score: 2, Interesting

      So, at what point does it become the responsibility of the police to do enough homework to make sure that their investigation dosen't harm many other businesses that are completely uninvolved in the search for evidence? What recourse do the other effected isp customers have?

      a) When hell freezes over
      b) None

      Except in a very few special cases where the police are being accused of having ulterior motives (groundless searches, SLAP-style shutdowns, excessive destruction of property), your recourse is none. Same that on the whole, you don't get any compensation if you get arrested and later checked out of the case.

      This isn't just limited to "other businesses". Imagine you're living in a household, and it turns out someone else has been naughty. When the police come to cease your computers, they will take all of them. No matter if your computer is clean, or that you need it for important work. Also by the time you get it back, it's lost a lot of value. You get any compensation for that? No.

      Basicly, as long as the police are conducting an legitimate investigation you don't get anything. These computers have the same owners, and the only thing we've got to say they're not involved in the operations of the Pirate Bay is their word. Was it within reason to seize them? Yes, it was. Does it suck for those affected? Yes, it does. But I don't think they'll get anything for their troubles.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    5. Re:Investigators liability? by MarkByers · · Score: 1

      But I don't think they'll get anything for their troubles.

      According to the old TPB homepage, just after the raid, they expect to get compensation from the Swedish Government if they are proven innocent of copyright infringement. I hope this includes: cost of purchasing new servers, loss of advertising revenue for several days, cost for emotional effects of being sent to prison, cost of relocating their business to a safer country, etc...

      This will hopefully teach the police to check the facts first and not just attack any individuals that the RIAA/MPAA chooses.

      --
      I'll probably be modded down for this...
    6. Re:Investigators liability? by Svartalf · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Basicly, as long as the police are conducting an legitimate investigation you don't get anything.

      According to the Swedish news coverage, there is some legitimate doubts as to whether it was a legitimate investigation or not. Their laws don't make linking to infingements an illegality. As such, since The Pirate Bay didn't host anything that is illegal per Swedish law. Now, it gets even better than this. According to people over there the national police happen to keep whingeing about not having enough manpower, etc. to enforce problems like drug trafficing, etc. and little gets done about real problems- but they can muster 50(!) people to "bust" a place that doesn't do anything illegal per their laws as a result of pressure being put on them from MPAA and others in the US. It's my understanding that there's a lot of people pissed about it over there right now.
      --
      I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
    7. Re:Investigators liability? by mkw87 · · Score: 4, Insightful
      frankly America and the American mentality scares me

      Try living here...

      --
      Arguing with an engineer is like wrestling a pig in mud. Soon, you realize the pig is dirty, and he likes it.
    8. Re:Investigators liability? by tomhudson · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Oh come on ... the video from the surveillance cameras shows they took their sweet time checking out the server racks. They didn't have to take all the hardware they took (and who the fuck needs to wear camo on a raid of a server room anyway?).

      The warrant was for seizing the servers hosting TPB; any seizure exceeding that was outside the scope of the warrant, and that's why they (the police and the minister of justice) are in the crapper - taking something that's outside the scope of the warrant is theft. That they covered the security cameras with garbage bags partway through just makes them look guiltier.

      So - either:

      1. the police couldn't properly identify the hardware in question, in which case they were incompetent, and should have called in someone with more expertise, or
      2. they could, but over-reached.
      3. they purposefully grabbed more than they were entitled to, hoping for a backlash against TPB for causing the inconvenience
      Those are the only options. How much you want to bet it was #3, seeing as politicians and the **AA were involved? This is a very public cluster-fuck, and someone will have to pay, both politically and financially.
    9. Re:Investigators liability? by popeguilty · · Score: 3, Insightful

      As an American, I spend a lot of time alternately baffled, terrified, annoyed, and enraged at my fellow citizens. We're a bizarre place.

    10. Re:Investigators liability? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      BZZT! Wrong!
      In Sweden, you have even less rights than in the US. In the US, you have Miranda rights, proper search warrants (that have to be shown to the suspect), standars of admission for evidence (i.e. illegally obtained evidence is not admissible in court), you name it. In Sweden? None of these.

      Go check out http://www.avslaget.se/ and find out just how many rights you have as an innocent suspect.

    11. Re:Investigators liability? by v1 · · Score: 1

      I don't know how it typically works in Sweden, but in most parts of the world, law enforcement has free reign to trounce and trample on everyone's rights in the name of "pursuit of justice", whether or not justice is eventually delivered as a result. The are rarely if ever required to make restitution for the inconvenience and expense they cause.

      In most countries, once your hardware gets seized it can be very difficult or just outright impossible to recover your property, and certainly not in a timely manner. You read about stories all the time in the US where someone for example gets their car seized as part of a raid, and before the owner can get the courts to force it back to them, it's already been sold at a government auction. In most of these cases the owner of the property was completely uninvolved, it could have been a car just parked at the curb in front of the house as the owner was happened to be visiting a friend across the street that day.

      The scope of this seizure is absurd. The whole point of a raid is to remove evidence of a corroborated crime, not to grab everything in in the building. The seizures I'm familiar with require probable cause, and a warrant for seizure that must be specific about the items/persons to be seized. I wonder if this was a "carte blanch" seizure, in other words, "we take everything in sight"?

      --
      I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
    12. Re:Investigators liability? by Znork · · Score: 4, Interesting

      "(groundless searches, SLAP-style shutdowns, excessive destruction of property)"

      Both groundless searches and excessive destruction of property would be possible in this case; there has been no attempt whatsoever of the parties to in any way hide what they're doing, there has been public debate on the issue, there have been court cases giving credible support to the idea that linking is not infringement, everything's been open and available. Even seizing the actual pirate bay servers might be excessive, there is no grounds to suspect any destruction or tampering with evidence would be done; the parties in question do not consider their content illegal.

      Basically it reeks of intimidation. Anyone around you doing something the MPAA doesnt like? Never mind if it's illegal or not, better get them to stop, or _you_ will be targeted. Collective punishment without due process.

      They even took DNA from the _legal counsel_. In a possible contributory IP infringement case?? What are they going to use that for? As it has no value as evidence whatsoever, one can only assume they're planning to place it on some other crimescene or hand it to foreign intelligence. I cant think of any reasonable reason to take it, so the conclusion has to be they have some unreasonable purpose.

      This isnt justice. This is state-sponsored political terrorism.

    13. Re:Investigators liability? by Markus+Landgren · · Score: 1

      Umm... we do have laws about police conduct. But they're not enforced.

    14. Re:Investigators liability? by Rogerborg · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      You're talking about the situation in Sweden, yes? No? Shut up then.

      --
      If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
    15. Re:Investigators liability? by Kojiro+Ganryu+Sasaki · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Even worse is that this raid might be the action of one single minister. This minister might also be acting under pressure from the MPAA (as reported by swedish television). If it's case, it's against the swedish constitution. A minister can't just order the police to raid someone.

    16. Re:Investigators liability? by illuminatedwax · · Score: 1, Informative

      They don't have free speech, either: making disparaging remarks about minority groups is illegal. For example, a pastor in Sweden said that "all gays are a cancer on society." Got fined/imprisoned (i forget which).

      --
      Did you ever notice that *nix doesn't even cover Linux?
    17. Re:Investigators liability? by erroneus · · Score: 1

      Kinda makes you think there was money being sent from the US to support and encourage this activity doesn't it? Since it was the U.S.'s MPAA requesting the US Government put pressure on Sweden, there must be some record of the U.S.'s official involvement in this. I would like to know what exchanges took place that resulted in the action of seizure of TPB's servers and detainment of its operators!

      Surely someone out there knows how to get that information. Anyone?

    18. Re:Investigators liability? by carnifex0 · · Score: 1

      You read about stories all the time in the US where someone for example gets their car seized as part of a raid, and before the owner can get the courts to force it back to them, it's already been sold at a government auction. In most of these cases the owner of the property was completely uninvolved, it could have been a car just parked at the curb in front of the house as the owner was happened to be visiting a friend across the street that day.

      Please provide a single corroborated instance of this occurring. I'll be the most surprised person on Earth if you can, but since you read about it 'all the time' it shouldn't be that much of a problem for you.

    19. Re:Investigators liability? by topham · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Considering 60 minutes did coverage of it about 8 years ago it shouldn't be too hard.

      But hey, it should be illegal to use cash to buy airline tickets, right?

    20. Re:Investigators liability? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      BZZT! Wrong!

      >In the US, you have Miranda rights,
      We got that too... You don't have to say anything when questioned by the Police.

      >proper search warrants (that have to be shown to the suspect),
      Got that! Read "Rättegångsbalken 28 Kap." http://www.notisum.se/rnp/SLS/LAG/19420740.htm

      >standars of admission for evidence (i.e. illegally obtained evidence is not admissible in court)
      We have standards and laws regulating collecting evidence. We don't have a law that says that illegaly obtained evidence cannot be used (and franctly, such a law is pretty stupid) but the person collecting the evidence will be prosecuted if they don't follow the rules. It is illegal for the police to set up a victim and such evidence is both illegal and not valid here.

      >you name it.
      Please do...

      >In Sweden? None of these.
      As I wrote above, we have all of those you mention, but not exactly the same. Please do some research before you throw away such ignorant comments again. The pirate bay incident have been handled in a way that might be unlawful and that is being investigated by both KU (the Constitutional Committee of the Swedish Riksdag) and JO (The Parliamentary Ombudsmen):
      http://www.jo.se/Page.aspx?Language=sv&ObjectClass =DynamX_Document&Id=2002

    21. Re:Investigators liability? by Jackie_Chan_Fan · · Score: 1

      the American mentality scares me

      Scares you?! I'm an American and i'm horrified. You should be way beyond scared if i'm horrified :)

    22. Re:Investigators liability? by carnifex0 · · Score: 1

      Sixty Minutes did a story about someone completely uninvolved with a crime (an honest innocent bystander) having their vehicle seized and sold at auction with absolutely no recourse?

      Bullshit. Not in the litigious society in which we live.

    23. Re:Investigators liability? by nutshell42 · · Score: 1

      Music Piracy Unit Raids ISP in BitTorrent Assault

      *radio chirps*

      we have 404 in progress

      *chirp*

      they've taken down the links

      *chrip*

      I'm goin' in

      *chirp*

      *crashing sounds*

      *screams*

      put down the network cable!

      put your hands above your head!

      Hey, you, in the greatfull dead tshirt and the
      "fuck-you" hat! Ya you, drop the Peanut butter
      and jelly sandwich right now!!

      The tough jobs of tough men in law enforcement and the War on Torrent....

      *sob*

      Disclaimer: Not mine but I can't remember where that quote's from

      --
      Don't think of it as a flame---it's more like an argument that does 3d6 fire damage
    24. Re:Investigators liability? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We do, but we also have a law against hate speech that is somewhat controversial.

      Here is a bit about our Yttrandefrihetslag (Fundamental Law on Freedom of Expression):
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fundamental_Law_on_Fr eedom_of_Expression_(1991)

      The Act on Persecution of Minority Groups clashes big time with our fundamental law on Freedom of Expression when it comes to religious matters and has been questioned from time to time but in the matter of public hate speech we don't have total freedom of expression and in that sence you are right.

      The matter on Åke Green:
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%85ke_Green

    25. Re:Investigators liability? by ericdano · · Score: 1

      Awww. Now just cause you live in San Francisco don't be dissing the rest of the States. In fact, there are normal people living just across the bridge from you.

      --
      It's either on the beat or off the beat, it's that easy.
      I moderate therefore I rule!
      --
    26. Re:Investigators liability? by Digitalia · · Score: 1

      The MPAA is a private entity. They're under no obligation to divulge any information. If they were a government entity, you could file a Freedom of Information Act request that the information be provided, assuming it weren't classified. After waiting a little while, the government would mail you a copy of the records you requested.

      Of course, the MPAA is private so none of that applies. They can be as evil and manipulative as they want, and the only way we'll ever know is if a highly-placed member of the MPAA blows the whistle. That's not going to happen, though...

      --
      Pax Digitalia
    27. Re:Investigators liability? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not even America has the leeway for police that you seem to be implying.

    28. Re:Investigators liability? by geminidomino · · Score: 2, Funny

      In another case of poor journalism, the above post mistakes a fact of utmost importance.

      Fortunately, we here at FoxDot news have the REAL story. As Sweden's police stood up for the rights of media artists and fans worldwide, defending all civilized nations from the threat of terrorism funded by..er.. free music and movie downloads, the unthinkable was happening.

      The suspect, whose name has not been released on his way to Guantanomo Bay, was not eating a "peanut butter and jelly sandwich."

      We here at FoxDot are here to tell you:

      It was a fluffernutter.

    29. Re:Investigators liability? by popeguilty · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      I make mention of my discomfort with my fellow Americans, and I get +1, but I make an analogy between religion and software and get nothing? Oy.

    30. Re:Investigators liability? by pawsa · · Score: 1

      One statement above is incorrect: the fines in Sweden do not depend on on your income. The poster has confused Sweden with Finland.

    31. Re:Investigators liability? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Google: "illegal car seizure sold at auction 60 minutes drugs"

      A car seized illegally: http://www.ij.org/private_property/new_jersey/back ground.html

      A man KILLED due to an illegal search: http://www.fear.org/scott.html

      Years ago there were many stories in the popular press (I used to read them in the Houston Chronicle) about the "War on Drugs" and automatic seizure. People losing their houses, cars, etc., because an erroneous "tip" led to a seizure, and since their stuff is gone they don't have the money to sue to get it back.

      There goes your bullshit.

    32. Re:Investigators liability? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Of a car? Hm, without a name, that specific case is pretty hard, due to the fact that the war on drugs have created plenty of such seizures, probably due to the fact that some percetage of seized assets belong to the cops. There's a pretty nice site here, usually with links to external news sources (when they havent expired): http://www.fear.org/list.html

      The comments in this blog post provide plenty of links in the process of the seizures. Basically, the property itself is declared guilty of facilitating some crime, a shady tactic that sidesteps citizens' rights to due process because things are not citizens of this great country. http://talkleft.com/new_archives/014502.html

    33. Re:Investigators liability? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What do you mean "this is Sweden not USA"? American law is the global law and it's the only law citizen!

      Always remember that they have 4.5% of the world's population. They also consume most of your resources, usually grabed through military force and corruption.
      Always remember who's gun you hold in your mouth citizen!

    34. Re:Investigators liability? by Jugalator · · Score: 4, Informative

      Now, it gets even better than this. According to people over there the national police happen to keep whingeing about not having enough manpower, etc. to enforce problems like drug trafficing, etc. and little gets done about real problems- but they can muster 50(!) people to "bust" a place that doesn't do anything illegal per their laws as a result of pressure being put on them from MPAA and others in the US. It's my understanding that there's a lot of people pissed about it over there right now.

      Agreed, I'm a Swede and there are problems with police shortage in many cities here. Ours would basically celebrate if we got as few as 10-20 more our way to, you know, handle abuse and rape and drug cases.

      To make matters worse, the Swedish police have also earlier said they aren't intending to prioritize these cases too much, which made a lot of sense given the overall situation. Then this happens, where they get 50 officers to arrest 3 people and clean 1 server hall. If it weren't for the serious matters here, I'd start trying to come up with "how many Swedish police officers does it take to screw in a lightbulb", but I'm to annoyed to be in the mood right now. :-p

      Anyway, thankfully, the case with piracy involved hasn't scared away politicians, and a political party member has contacted the Parliamentary Ombudsman part for these reasons, part for others in this controversial move (like not granting lawyer defense for one of the arrested, but still for another), and it remains to be seen whether any actions will be taken against Thomas Bodström.

      --
      Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
    35. Re:Investigators liability? by timeOday · · Score: 1
      We do, but we also have a law against hate speech that is somewhat controversial.
      Is that all the minister said, "all gays are a cancer on society"? Is it also illegal and punishable to say, "religion is a cancer on society"?
    36. Re:Investigators liability? by Husgaard · · Score: 4, Interesting
      The video shows that the police covers up the cameras, so they most likely wanted to hide something during the raid. And I guess that they forgot that they were in a high-security hosting facility - most likely the swedish secret police is p*ssed at them for covering the cameras.

      They are liable for any damages, including downtime for legal services. They have publicly confirmed that after the raid.

      And most likely they will end up paying big time. Instead of just taking TPB's servers as the warrant allowed, they took all servers hosted by the same hosting provider . Most likely to make an (illegal) example, trying to make the hosting provider go bankrupt and instill fear in other hosting providers. About 200 legitimate businesses in Sweden are down right now because of this.

    37. Re:Investigators liability? by d2ksla · · Score: 1
      the fines in Sweden do not depend on on your income

      What about "dagsböter" (http://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dagsbot)???

    38. Re:Investigators liability? by a_n_d_e_r_s · · Score: 2, Informative

      Actually he was found innocent in the swedish supreme court(Högsta domstolen- HD).

      The reason of holding the speach in the first place was to get it to HD so he could test the laws regaring the relationship of free speach, freedom of religion and laws against hate crimes.

      --
      Just saying it like it are.
    39. Re:Investigators liability? by smidget2k4 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      That is of course, unless you are labeled a "terrorist" here and sent off to some secret prison, never to be heard from again.

      Does Sweden have secret prisons where they can hold you indefinatly, without a trial, and without a reason?

    40. Re:Investigators liability? by fbjon · · Score: 1

      Sounds like a parody of the scene with the police team entering the casino vault in Ocean's Eleven.

      --
      True confidence comes not from realising you are as good as your peers, but that your peers are as bad as you are.
    41. Re:Investigators liability? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >Is that all the minister said, "all gays are a cancer on society"?

      No, he said a lot more but I have not read the protocol from the court in that case so I don't really know exactly how they reasoned or what they considered to break the law.

      >Is it also illegal and punishable to say, "religion is a cancer on society"?

      No, religion is not a group of people in minority and thus religion is not protected against hate speech in any way.

    42. Re:Investigators liability? by carnifex0 · · Score: 1

      I'm not arguing that property seizures happen, I have an issue with the concept of 'sold at auction before anyone could so anything about it'. It's the concept that a cop is just going to come up and take your car, then sell it at auction with you not being able to do anything about it that's wrong.

      That's why we have things like courts, to prevent things like that from occurring.

    43. Re:Investigators liability? by geobeck · · Score: 1
      The warrant was for seizing the servers hosting TPB; any seizure exceeding that was outside the scope of the warrant...

      Well, that's the problem, isn't it? I wonder if they expected to walk in and find a bunch of server racks, neatly separated, with big signs on top of them proclaiming which companies were hosted on which servers.

      ...or maybe they figured the pirate servers would have jolly roger flags on the console screens?

      --
      Find environmentally and socially responsible products on http://buy-right.net
    44. Re:Investigators liability? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Being from the U.S., I can't help but feel some guilt stemming from suspicion that my government acted in concert with the MPAA to encourage this nonsense. The media cartels are really out of control, and it surprises me that there isn't a backlash toward copyright over their actions of the last 10 years or so.

      When I read about this, I imagined some MPAA minion sitting in front of his computer with a grin on his face from having knocked that cocky website off of the Internets. Filled with glee, treating the real world like some kind of videogame. We'll teach those Swedes to put snarky letters on their website! Hahaha! While valuable law enforcement officers are preparing to Waco a datacenter.

    45. Re:Investigators liability? by kimvette · · Score: 1
      Remember that this is Sweden, not USA we talking about, in here the police doesn't have any more leeway when it comes to laws than normal citicens.


      Actually here in America, the police and political elite have no more leeway than anyone else according to the law; all are accountable to the laws and ultimately to the people.

      The problem is, unfortunately, that we keep reelecting corrupt bastards who twist and bend the law, and outright ignore it when they deem it to be convenient for their own purposes, and selectively enforce the laws. This is where theory vs. practice breaks down.
      --
      The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
    46. Re:Investigators liability? by erroneus · · Score: 1

      According to the Swedish reports, it was the US Federal government that prompted the action, not the MPAA. While it was done at the MPAA's influence, it was a US Government action. That's what I'd like to see exposed.

    47. Re:Investigators liability? by dapyx · · Score: 2, Interesting

      According to the TPB guys, each server had a label which indicated for which site it was used.

      --
      I'm sorry, the number you have dialed is an imaginary number. Please rotate your phone 90 degrees and dial again.
    48. Re:Investigators liability? by linuxhansl · · Score: 2, Insightful
      In the US, you have Miranda rights, proper search warrants (that have to be shown to the suspect), standars of admission for evidence (i.e. illegally obtained evidence is not admissible in court)

      So you have some pretty, shiny laws, that's very nice...
      Doesn't the constitution also state that all (wo)men are equal? Yet there was segregation. How about "Innocent until proven guilty"? Tell that to the folks imprisioned at various Military camps for terrorist charges. The FBI/NSA/whatever can do secret wiretapping, or subpoena library records at will, etc.
      Laws that can be (and are) broken whenever convenient are worth exactly... Well, nothing!

      The is the funny thing with some Americans, from young age on they are brainwashed to believe they live in the "Land of the Free", dutyfully perform their "Pledge of Allegiance" every morning, and taught how their great forefather-heros colonized the country... To the extend that it does not matter what actually happens, they believe what they were told.

    49. Re:Investigators liability? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In the US, you have Miranda rights, proper search warrants (that have to be shown to the suspect)

      Heh. In the US, they wait until you're not home, and then come with the search warrant. You don't answer the door, so they kick it down. Wouldn't make that much difference if you were home, they only wait about 5 seconds after knocking before kicking it down.

      Yes, I do know this.

    50. Re:Investigators liability? by SvnLyrBrto · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Well... it's POSSIBLE to deliver a bit of comeuppance to police who abuse you... just not through official channels. As with too many things in this country, you have to know the right people in order to get justice.

      Some years back, a friend of mine was arrested for a crime he didn't commit. Turns out, he bears a physical resemblance (similar height, build, and hair color/style)to a, at the time, fairly well known drug dealer in the party scene. He was at this party that was getting broken up; the pigs were there looking to arrest the drug dealer; and when they couldn't find him, they decided that my friend (Who, other than working as a bartender for a while, has never sold drugs in his life.) was "close enough for government work" and decided to call it a day by arresting and accusing him instead.

      Yeah, he was quickly released. But officially, there was no recourse for him. And oh, but did he try... retaining a fairly good lawyer to try to get at the pigs. But no dice. As you point out, they've weaseled quite a few laws into place to shield themselves from recourse when they decide to abuse the innocent.

      But there's a light at the end of the tunnel... if it turns out that you know the right people, that is. After about a couple years' worth of working at it; he was able to raise enough hell via his father's and grandfather's Lodge connections to have the arresting officer fired, and his partner demoted out of the narcotics unit all the way back down to traffic patrol. Not quite the prison time that they deserved for trying to frame an innocent person, but I'm told that the fired pig eventually had to sell his house at a loss and move himself and family out of town to start at the bottom of another police department, and the partner, even though not fired, had his career seriously derailed.

      Suffice it to say, during that time, my friend recognized the advantages of having "friends in high places", and took his lodge degrees himself.

      cya,
      john

      --
      Imagine all the people...
    51. Re:Investigators liability? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      ...police officers can generally murder people without consequences, if you actually file a suit for a little lost income any prosecutor is only going to laugh it away.
      No. Wrongful death suits involving an officer shooting a person are a nearly guaranteed seven-figure settlement, even in cases where the shooting was pretty clearly justified. It's much cheaper for the state to settle than deal with all the negative press, protests, etc.
    52. Re:Investigators liability? by 6Yankee · · Score: 4, Funny

      "how many Swedish police officers does it take to screw in a lightbulb"

      Two - but how do you get them in there?

    53. Re:Investigators liability? by dr_dank · · Score: 1

      Disclaimer: Not mine but I can't remember where that quote's from

      The part about the Grateful Dead t-shirt and the "Fuck You" hat was lifted from a George Carlin routine about flying on airplanes. Referring to the stewardesses/cabin attendants/etc as "uniformed crewmembers", as opposed to the guy in the Grateful Dead t-shirt and "Fuck You" hat.

      (Who's on his ninth little bottle of Kahlua, I might add!)

      --
      Where does the school board find them and why do they keep sending them to ME?
    54. Re:Investigators liability? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Of course not. Only minorities have rights. You can't ever do or say anything that offends a minority; that makes you an evil person. If you do the same thing to a heterosexual white male, you are fighting the evil white power, which apparently needs to be abolished so that we can have true multiculturalism, everyone can do what he/she/it wants, and we can have anarchy and poverty until the Chinese or Latin American communists come and restore some semblance of order. Don't get me wrong - we'll still have poverty, just not anarchy.

    55. Re:Investigators liability? by ruiner13 · · Score: 4, Funny
      "and who the fuck needs to wear camo on a raid of a server room anyway?"

      No kidding. Much more effective camo in that terrain would be a Sun microsystems hat and a half-life 2 t-shirt. And don't forget the sweat pants! He'd be nearly invisible!

      --

      today is spelling optional day.

    56. Re:Investigators liability? by Bromskloss · · Score: 1
      The video shows that the police covers up the cameras
      Gah, _that_ I have a problem with! Why are they doing that?!?! I want my authorities to be open about practically everything. Why on earth should they be allowed to have secrets?
      --
      Swedish plasma phys. PhD student; MSc EE; knows maths, programming, electronics; finance interest; seeks opportunities
    57. Re:Investigators liability? by muffen · · Score: 1, Troll
      Does Sweden have secret prisons where they can hold you indefinatly, without a trial, and without a reason?
      I started laughing when I read that. In Sweden, we have prisons where they cannot hold you, after a trial, with a reason, at all. People escape them all the time and you should be happy if a murderer gets more than 5 years. Rape might get you 3 or 4... but one things for sure, do not attempt to avoid taxes, then they will get the big slapstick out.
    58. Re:Investigators liability? by Hope+Thelps · · Score: 1

      The video shows that the police covers up the cameras

      I don't know what the legal position is but imho a search warrant should be directed at a specific purpose, presumably searching for evidence of a crime. It shouldn't permit police to interfere with whatever they feel like on the premises other than in pursuing their search. I can't imagine any legitimate reason for them interfering with the cameras in this way - it should be illegal unless clearly authorised by the warrant.

      --
      To summarise the summary of the summary: people are a problem. ~ h2g2
    59. Re:Investigators liability? by Razor+Sex · · Score: 1

      They don't have free speech, either


      False. According to 2005 rankings, Sweden had the 12th freest press in the world; the United States is 46th. US press freedom in Iraq is 147th.

    60. Re:Investigators liability? by Black+Pete · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Why was the parent modded as Flamebait?

      He's right -- the video does indeed show the police covering up the cameras with garbage bags. Until the cameras were covered, the video doesn't show much: A bunch of guys standing around looking at the servers, chatting on a cellphone, a guy pointing around at the cameras(!), etc.

      I was immediately suspicious once the cameras were covered -- I'd have thought the police (of all people) would welcome the cameras since it'd be hard proof that everything they did was on the up and up, they have video backup for when they testify in court, the defendant(s) can't claim they planted evidence, etc, etc.

      When the police covers up cameras to hide their actions, that shows very clearly they know they're planning to do something questionable (if not outright illegal). In my books, that's not flamebait, that's worth investigating.

      The fact they took a whole bunch of servers rather than just TPB is hardly flamebait-worthy either. It's a serious issue. Especially for the (more) legit businesses involved.

    61. Re:Investigators liability? by CCFreak2K · · Score: 1

      I thought the answer was 50?

      --
      "Beware of he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart he dreams himself your master."
    62. Re:Investigators liability? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What!?!?!? The police objected to being monitored as they were going about their business? That's unpossible!!! What do they have to fear if they weren't doing anything illegal. I don't understand!?!?!? Please explain.

    63. Re:Investigators liability? by RobertLTux · · Score: 1

      as it so happens ive heard that the servers were in fact labeled (it makes sense even if they didn't have "example.com" on the label they should be able to ask to see the log that says that Rack 0016 blade number 32 is "example.com" so yes a bulk yank of the servers was outside the warrant.

      --
      Any person using FTFY or editing my postings agrees to a US$50.00 charge
    64. Re:Investigators liability? by aliquis · · Score: 1

      But regular people doesn't have as much freedom of speak as does the press. For example PUL.

    65. Re:Investigators liability? by geobeck · · Score: 1
      ...they should be able to ask to see the log that says that Rack 0016 blade number 32 is "example.com".

      But that's the point. They obviously didn't bring anyone along who knew how to open a console and check a log. And apparently they didn't order one of the techs to show them the log/directory--or the techs refused to do so. (I haven't seen the video, because "The Police Bay" seemed to have been slashdotted when I checked. The seizure video was listed as one of the top torrents, but I couldn't retrieve it.)

      --
      Find environmentally and socially responsible products on http://buy-right.net
    66. Re:Investigators liability? by Alchemar · · Score: 1

      Congress member cannot be detained if on the way to vote. They might have to pay for it later, but they could do anything they wanted in that brief period of time. It use to be a far fetched idea that it would be abused, but with the rest of the stunts being pulled, I could see it happening.

      The legal system in America is dependent on money. I have personally seen several people (me included) get railroaded in court because they didn't have enough money for an attorney, or the required court fee to file an appeal. The country is run by lawyers, and they don't look kindly to you interfering in the legal system unless you are a layer or paying one. FYI - I had my Drivers license pulled in civil court for a traffic accident. No one wea hurt, but they rang up sever thousand dollars in medical bills. They kept saying it was for different people, and people that were not even in the car. They filled under a new law that the judge was not familar with. The judge asked the other attorney what the law said he had to do. The only chance I had to protest anything, I showed the judge where the names on the bills I was sen't didn't match, the other attorney told the judge that those were medical bills, and that I didn't have a right to look at them, even though they sent them. So they were deemed inadmisable. The guy before me had 17 DWI convictions and walked with a fine because he had a good lawyer.

    67. Re:Investigators liability? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, and you consider yourself an Anarchist, right? Sure, you do.
              Fascist Fuck go to hell with your bigotry.

    68. Re:Investigators liability? by tomhudson · · Score: 1
      Its a good thing they didn't go on September 19th ( http://www.talklikeapirate.com/ ).

      Cop: Which servers are for The Pirate Bay site?

      Hosting Co: Arrrghhh, what you be looking fore, mate?

      Cop: Which servers are for The Pirate Bay site?

      Hosting Co: You be lookin' to abscound with the treasure, eh, matey? Cop: That's it - just grab everything!

    69. Re:Investigators liability? by Snaller · · Score: 1

      According to the Swedish news coverage, there is some legitimate doubts as to whether it was a legitimate investigation or not. Their laws don't make linking to infingements an illegality. As such, since The Pirate Bay didn't host anything that is illegal per Swedish law.

      I dont believe that. Surely they too have laws which specify you are not allowed to help others comit a crime - bang, they could get them there.

      But even if they don't, they are a signatory of the Berne Convention, so they will have to change their laws.

      Already there are stories in the media that this raid came after pressure from the US - should there be a hole in the law its likely to be changed quickly.

      --
      If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
    70. Re:Investigators liability? by MourningBlade · · Score: 1

      There is one thing that I really like about the Swedes that we have had sometimes here in America, and that's a respect for the rule of law.

      I don't mean that as in all Swedes respect the law, but that they have a good sense that the laws apply equally to all.

      Fixing parking tickets, the amazing way in which police officers seem to always obey the speed limits in their off-hours, privileged/protected minorities/positions, etc occur there less often than America.

      It's actually very refreshing and makes a difference in the personality of Swedes.

      Honestly, it's like economic and social freedom: they're all-pervasive, and chilling effects can make it to where you can't quite put a finger on how you're unfree...but how much of both you have over time influences your character.

      It's one of the great reasons to travel. If you get a chance you should stop by in Sweden, it's a lovely country with great people. My views on economic freedom make me lean more towards living in Hong Kong than in Sweden, but I still keep a membership card to a bar at Lund University in my wallet - it makes me happy. ;-)

    71. Re:Investigators liability? by cfavader · · Score: 1

      What kind of idiots would send 50 people to raid a fucking server room?

      Oh wait...

    72. Re:Investigators liability? by syukton · · Score: 1

      I respectfully submit:
          4. They purposefully grabbed more than they were entitled to because they were ordered to do so.
          5. They purposefully grabbed more than they were entitled to, hoping for a backlash against Swedish Minister of Justice Thomas Bodström, because they think that enforcing copyright law at the same level as theft or rape is absolutely nuts.

      The police follow orders, period. They may have their own opinions but at the end of the day, they just do what they're told. In this instance, doing what they were told may have been in line with furthering their own goals for making the current government look bad.

      So no, your options are not the only options. I would like to belive that it's #5.

      --
      Reinvent the wheel only at either a lower cost, greater effectiveness, or your own personal enrichment and satisfaction.
    73. Re:Investigators liability? by mrchaotica · · Score: 1
      That's why we have things like courts, to prevent things like that from occurring.
      No, the courts are just there to fix things afterwards. The people who are supposed to prevent things like that from occurring are the police themselves!
      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    74. Re:Investigators liability? by illuminatedwax · · Score: 1

      Your counterexample would have made sense if it had anything to do with the kind of speech I was talking about.

      --
      Did you ever notice that *nix doesn't even cover Linux?
    75. Re:Investigators liability? by LX.onesizebigger · · Score: 1

      If you knew about them, they wouldn't be secret, now would they?

      --
      I for one welcome our new SCOviet Russian overlords to whom all our base are belong.
    76. Re:Investigators liability? by mkw87 · · Score: 1

      Actually, I live in Pennsylvania, its worse than San Fran probably. Can't wait to graduate college in a year and move.

      --
      Arguing with an engineer is like wrestling a pig in mud. Soon, you realize the pig is dirty, and he likes it.
    77. Re:Investigators liability? by adrianmonk · · Score: 1
      Remember that this is Sweden, not USA we talking about, in here the police doesn't have any more leeway when it comes to laws than normal citicens.

      So in Sweden, if the speed limit is 100 km/h and if a policeman behind you sees you going 110 km/h, he can't exceed the speed limit in order to catch up with you and give you a ticket?

    78. Re:Investigators liability? by pVoid · · Score: 1
      I would like to add:

      In the US, the land of capitalism, it has become that laws are merely a price tag, e.g "It will cost you 3 million dollars to dump toxic waste in this garden here. It will cost 4 million to do it the 'legal' way... Corporate decision: dump it, get fined, be done." Another one: "It will cost you x years in prison, with y dollar bail for insider trading. You will make z = x * 100 + y profit off of it, just do it, and be done."

      Even better now is how citizens are willing to exchange 'security' for 'freedom'. A slippery slope.

      I just pray to god every day that the empire will crumble before it has a chance to spread its seeds of degeneracy everywhere - and I am serious about this. People do not realize how many cultures have been simply anhialated by the US empire.

    79. Re:Investigators liability? by Gogo0 · · Score: 1

      Hey! Youre not allowed to defend America here!
      Save it for the MPAA forums, you Haliburton agent!

    80. Re:Investigators liability? by Gogo0 · · Score: 1

      Of course not!

      They are secret, after all.

    81. Re:Investigators liability? by Chandon+Seldon · · Score: 1

      Yea, it'd be nice if you could sue the government, wouldn't it?

      --
      -- The act of censorship is always worse than whatever is being censored. Always.
    82. Re:Investigators liability? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      They even took DNA from the _legal counsel_. In a possible contributory IP infringement case?? What are they going to use that for?
      Well duh! Clearly they intend to clone him! If there's a lawyer out there - with the balls to wipe his ass with bullshit legal threats - then RIAA simply must have one of their own. Think about it - If you got a legal threats in the mail with brown stains on them wouldn't you be scared?
    83. Re:Investigators liability? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They were obviously plain-clothes cops, so the camo was probably just an indication of that one guys (lack of) fashion sense...

      From what I've heard (from a not necessarily reliable source), their method of selection was to take all the machines on any rack that contained any items belonging to The Pirate Bay, so they did take plenty of innocent machines, but didn't quite empty the entire server room.

    84. Re:Investigators liability? by tomhudson · · Score: 1

      That sounds akin to taking the whole filing cabinet for any filing cabinet that contains any item mentioned in a warrant. Don't see how that's going to play in a good light.

    85. Re:Investigators liability? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually the US is a superb country with regard to the rights of its citizens. In Sweden no one can recite the constitution since its written just like another law. This means that the people essentially doesn't have any rights, since they can't argue them, and to argue the constitution in court is considered as a certain way to lose the case.
      To sum up Swedish law, let me introduce you to the "opt-out clause", this gives the government the right to accept-but-ignore any court decision. If for instance the Swedish supreme court ruled that a government organisation had broken the law and should pay a fine, the organisation could simply state that "we accept the decision, but respectfully decline to pay the fine", case closed. This is why the police won't pay any fines, the government won't be forced to repay the lost income or property in any way, no swede wins against the government without bankrupting themselves.

    86. Re:Investigators liability? by Phisbut · · Score: 1
      While it was done at the MPAA's influence, it was a US Government action. That's what I'd like to see exposed.

      Expect to see this tagged as a "national security" issue and therefore not releasable under any freedom of information act whatsoever. Very few things are not about national security in the US anymore...

      --
      After 3 days without programming, life becomes meaningless
      - The Tao of Programming
    87. Re:Investigators liability? by init100 · · Score: 1

      Already there are stories in the media that this raid came after pressure from the US - should there be a hole in the law its likely to be changed quickly.

      It is equally likely that if evidence is found that the ministry of justice ordered the police to conduct this raid, the ones in charge (like the secretary of justice) will face prosecution for violating the Swedish constitution. The administration is simply not allowed to tell hired officials (i.e. non-politicians) how they should do their jobs. If this pressure came from a foreign power (i.e. the US), this may severely aggravate the matter, if not in any investigation then in the upcoming election. Nobody want their elected administration to in reality just be a puppet administration for George W. Bush.

    88. Re:Investigators liability? by init100 · · Score: 1

      Oh come on ... the video from the surveillance cameras shows they took their sweet time checking out the server racks. They didn't have to take all the hardware they took (and who the fuck needs to wear camo on a raid of a server room anyway?).

      Another very valid question is: Why did the police cover the security cameras during a valid search?

    89. Re:Investigators liability? by init100 · · Score: 1

      I haven't seen the video, because "The Police Bay" seemed to have been slashdotted when I checked.

      You can find it here.

    90. Re:Investigators liability? by tomhudson · · Score: 1

      Its too bad the cameras didn't have sound!

      The hard drives aren't going to show anything that the police didn't already have on hand - that TPB hosted torrents. There was no need to seize any equipment - TPB's published legal archives made it quite clear what TPB was hosting (just torrents) and that nobody could download copyrighted materials directly from their servers.

      This whole thing is going to end up like Shylock in Shakespeare's play - "You're entitled to your pound of flesh as per the agreement, but not one drop of blood."

      Can you imagine the scene:

      Prosecutor: We used over 50 investigators to raid the sites, during which we inadvertently seized equipment hosting hundreds of other sites at the same time, and spent hundreds of hours documenting that TPB hosts torrent files. This has cost the taxpayer lots of kronor, as well as inconveniencing hundreds of other businesses. We will prove to the court that TPB was hosting these torrents.

      TPB: May it please the court, they didn't have to go to all that expense. All they had to do was visit the web site. It says we host torrents. It lists those torrrents. It evel lets them download the torrents. We have a legal section devoted to that fact. Oh, and we'll prove that the prosecutor's office is having its collective arse reamed on a daily basis by the US government.

    91. Re:Investigators liability? by Buran · · Score: 1

      A civil case like this is not a matter of national security and is therefore subject to the FOIA.

    92. Re:Investigators liability? by ProfFalcon · · Score: 1

      I can't imagine any legitimate reason for them interfering with the cameras in this way - it should be illegal unless clearly authorised by the warrant.

      One reason is for their own security. It may be standard practice to obstruct remote viewing to stop others from knowing their exact locations, etc. Not so important when you are raiding a place such as this but critical when you are raiding a crack house or meth lab. No sense giving the well armed guys watching the video in the other room more info on your whereabouts. If it's standard practice, they probably do not want to start building in exceptions to a potentially life-saving step in a raid.
      --
      Simply stating [Citation Needed] does not automatically make you insightful or brilliant.
    93. Re:Investigators liability? by mattsucks · · Score: 1

      4. They purposefully grabbed more than they were entitled to, hoping that the inevitable backlash would result in the person at the top who ordered the whole stupid operation would get shit-canned.

    94. Re:Investigators liability? by tomhudson · · Score: 1

      ... except that would get them shitcanned first, and give an out to the higher-up to cover his arse.

    95. Re:Investigators liability? by idonthack · · Score: 1

      No! Don't wear the Half-life shirt! The prancing will make you stand out.

      --
      Why is it that when you believe something it's an opinion, but when I believe something it's a manifesto?
    96. Re:Investigators liability? by Phisbut · · Score: 1
      A civil case like this is not a matter of national security and is therefore subject to the FOIA.

      Who are YOU to decide what's a matter of national security and what isn't? I think it's up to the President to decide that... quite unfortunately...

      --
      After 3 days without programming, life becomes meaningless
      - The Tao of Programming
    97. Re:Investigators liability? by Buran · · Score: 1

      Because copyright infringement is not, and never has been, something for the government to barge its nose into, and there's nothing to hide in an infringement case, that's why.

    98. Re:Investigators liability? by Anonymous+Cowpat · · Score: 1

      bah, they shouldn't sue the Swedish government for this, any compensation will be coming from the public purse, which gets it's money from Swedish taxpayers. They should be suing everyone up the chain of command who authorised/ordered it (which I understand goes up to the justice minister) as individuals. When scumbag prosecutors realise that using the law to persecute innocent people because the MPAA ask them to will result in them being personally bankrupted, they might think twice (or it might cost the MPAA a lot more to get them onboard). However, there are, no doubt, laws protecting those in power from being personally accountable.

      --
      FGD 135
  6. Examples Please! by kwandar · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I can only hope this is causing a huge scandal s Sweden as stated by the article. Can any Swedish readers provides us a synopsis of some of the reports on tv and in the newspaper?

    1. Re:Examples Please! by Shinaku · · Score: 1

      I'm also interested in how the Sweedish news papers have been reporting this. Would they show it as it truely is, or from some bastardised 'anti-piracy' angle?

      --
      -- :>
    2. Re:Examples Please! by Troed · · Score: 2, Informative

      They're mostly correct about what they write. Several editorials also point out that this fight _cannot_ be won by the music, film and software industries. They must adapt.

    3. Re:Examples Please! by seezer · · Score: 5, Informative

      This guy http://tpbeng.blogspot.com/ is translating local news to english.

    4. Re:Examples Please! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In short, the "scandal" comes down to two things:
      -Did the minister of justice interfer with police work and order the raid (possible after pressure from Hollywood). This would be a violation of Swedish law. The minister says he didn't, "sources" claim he did.
      - Several smaller companies have lost their internet access, stored data etc. and also claim to have been subjected to "guilt by association" due to this raid, something that hurt there business.
      The debate is rather high now on these issues, on what the current law states (two somewhat similar cases ended in a not guilty verdict since the site only contained links and not actual pirated software), and whether there will be a change in the law (which "experts" say is likely if there will be a not guilty verdict in this case).

    5. Re:Examples Please! by Caine · · Score: 4, Informative

      Virtually all major swedish newspapers (http://www.aftonbladet.se , http://www.dn.se/ http://www.expressen.se/ http://www.svd.se/ are leading with the "Pirate War" and news that Pirate Bay is back online.

      Media coverage have so far been very good, concentrating on the mismanaged raid, suffering of other hosted servers and the fact that the raid was not in line with the popular will.

      Swedish state television have also done a news report connecting US lobbying and the swedish minister of justice to the raid, which is seen as extremly bad. Several other politicians and the justice ombudsman have started investigation into the legality of the raid.

    6. Re:Examples Please! by DaveRexel · · Score: 2, Informative

      You are right, this scandal is getting serious media coverage in Sweden. Here are short quotes translated from Swedish Dagensindustri "it's like trying to eradicate dandelions" Aftonbladet "The media conglomerates have no chance against the youth" Dagens Nyheter "The Net-Pirates have won" Svenska Dagbladet "Net-Pirates have won" These are from our major newspapers and posted hurriedly from my MacBook while walking in a demonstration against this abuse of power by the police and **AA lackeys.

      --
      # ~: no sigs today
    7. Re:Examples Please! by Hinhule · · Score: 5, Interesting

      There have been numerous articles showing both sides of the story, often in the same newspaper.

      The swedish national TV station (funded by every household with a TV) ran a story based on an informant, basicly saying that the minister of justice was running errands for the white house. Ordering the takedown of the pirate bay even though prosecutors had already looked into it and found that they couldn't justify a takedown. The minister of justice and his departments actions are currently being investigated.

      There have been an online poll showing that about 87% think that music copying is ok. Most people also think that music piracy would go down significantly if a music CD had a resonable price.

      Oddly there have been no mention what people think of actual programs and games being copied. So as far as the masses are concerned they think TPB is used only to copy music and movies.

      I would like there to be an article around the fact that if TPB is found guilty of assisting copyright violations. Where do you draw the line? What about google or any other search engine? What about community sites, several cases of rape and pedophilia has been caused by connections made on such sites, are they assisting these crimes as well?

      Lots of people are outraged that the police already low resources are being wasted on copyright violations when people don't want to go alone at night out of fear of rape / muggings.

      All in all I think the media coverage have been better than expected.

    8. Re:Examples Please! by Eudial · · Score: 2, Interesting
      I can only hope this is causing a huge scandal s Sweden as stated by the article. Can any Swedish readers provides us a synopsis of some of the reports on tv and in the newspaper?


      It's not huge as of yet, but pretty big. It's not really front-page news with 20 minutes extra coverage on the evening news, yet it's definetly something the general public is aware of; and the police do not come off as the good guys in this drama. Some pretty harsh accusations have been made against the affected minister, that if proven true, will most likely lead to his removal from office.

      The bad part is that someone have DoS:ed the Swedish police's website, which has been giving the pirates a really bad name, and has made the "threat" of these sort of attacks against the government and media the latest target of media fearmongering.

      Yet still, the piracy party has more than doubled it's memberships.
      --
      GAAH! MY PRINTER IS ON FIRE!!! PUT IT OUT! PUT IT OUT!
    9. Re:Examples Please! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "posted hurriedly from my MacBook" PS i have a macbook, love me! please...

    10. Re:Examples Please! by Markus+Landgren · · Score: 1

      The reports in Swedish media have been surprisingly fair, in my opinion. Articles generally contain a factual error in just about every paragraph, but that's always the case when you read an article about something you already know something about, and does not suggest to me that some kind of media conspiracy is going on in this particular case. For example, I don't expect the average journalist to understand what BitTorrent actually is.

      Generally though, the mainstream media are consistently slow about reporting facts that support the filesharers. For example, the newspaper DN will never ever report that the police have done anything wrong until the cat is out of the bag and some other mainstream media outlet has already published the story, and so they kept silent as long as they could about the police grabbing hundreds of innocent businesses' servers which they had no warrant for seizing. And a lot of media outlets are reluctant to give any publicity to the Pirate Party. For example TV4 reported about the protests that were being organized by the Pirate Party and other political organizations, and enumerated all organizers except the Pirate Party. My guess is that TV4 do not want to alienate Hollywood, since they no doubt make good money from their shill "reports" about new Hollywood movies in their news shows.

    11. Re:Examples Please! by harlows_monkeys · · Score: 1
      Where do you draw the line? What about google or any other search engine? What about community sites, several cases of rape and pedophilia has been caused by connections made on such sites, are they assisting these crimes as well?

      The legal systems in most countries are able to take into account the intent of the actor when evaluating his/her/its actions.

    12. Re:Examples Please! by malchus842 · · Score: 1

      ran a story based on an informant, basicly saying that the minister of justice was running errands for the white house

      Earlier this week, I was listening to the Radio Sweden Podcast and the leader of the Left Party (Vänster Partiet) was complaining about the government being the errand-boy of George Bush. What's funny is that the current government is the Social Democrats!

      Given that there is an election coming shortly, is the center-right coalition even more pro-US? And will the Pirate Party get enough votes to take a place in Parliament?? That would be a real blow to the 'mainstream' parties.

    13. Re:Examples Please! by DaveRexel · · Score: 1

      OK I'll bite the trollbait,

      Of all the gear lying around I chose this laptop as the spec, form-factor and the sheer utilarian wonder of being able to switch wifi connections very simply while following a street manifestation in the center of a city was the main criterion.

      Yes, I could have lugged around my ùber-AMD gaming-desktop in a shopping cart with a massive ack while broadcasting but the MacBook was excellent för street-agitation in a good cause.

      --
      # ~: no sigs today
    14. Re:Examples Please! by kimvette · · Score: 1

      What about parks, several cases of rape and pedophilia has been caused by connections made on such sites, are they assisting these crimes as well?

      What about prisons, several cases of rape and pedophilia has been caused by connections made on such sites, are they assisting these crimes as well?

      What about the oval office, several cases of rape and pedophilia has been caused by connections made on such sites, are they assisting these crimes as well?

      What about the boy scouts/girl scouts/4H/Big Brothers/YMCA, several cases of rape and pedophilia has been caused by connections made on such sites, are they assisting these crimes as well?

      What about the public schools, several cases of rape and pedophilia has been caused by connections made on such sites, are they assisting these crimes as well?

      What about homes, several cases of rape and pedophilia has been caused by connections made on such sites, are they assisting these crimes as well?

      My point?

      Perverts and scumbags of the world are EVERYWHERE. There is nothing special about TPB, Myspace, or any other Internet venue which would be any different; perverts are just more visible there.

      --
      The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
    15. Re:Examples Please! by Fedasy · · Score: 1
      The following summary comes from https://www.piratpartiet.se/forum/Topic26094-15-1. aspx.

      According to the SVT (Swedish Public Service), MPAA was behind yesterday's raid against The Pirate Bay. This corresponds well with the MPAA public statement after the raid; ""the film industry has worked vigorously with Swedish and U.S. government officials in Sweden to shut the illegal (sic) site down".

      In April representatives for the Swedish Department of Justice and Swedish police met American authorities who, on request from the MPAA, brought up the filesharing issue. Three problems with Sweden were listed:

      * The Pirate Bay.
      * Many filesharing sites are based in Sweden.
      * A big share of filesharing material has its origins in Sweden.

      The Department then asked the police and prosecutors to act against the Pirate Bay. When they responded that the legality of the situation was unclear, the Minister of Justice's state secretary contacted the Prosecutor-General and the national Chief of police who gave the orders for the raid.

      According to SVT's Rapport, the MPAA contacted the White House. Then the American Ministry for Foreign Affairs contacted its Swedish counterpart and demanded a solution to the Pirate Bay issue.

      The fact that they did this is quite serious as these actions implicate minister rule, which is illegal according to the Swedish constitution.

      One might go so far as to consider Sweden's sovereignity violated. Add to this that it wasn't very long ago American CIA captured two people in Sweden (later to be transfered to Egypt), many are now upset over the Swedish government's submission.

      Not only the Pirate Bay, but Piratbyrån (Pirate bureau), a site trying to influence public opinion - against copyright - was raided at the same time. Henrik Pontén at Antipiratbyrån (Anti pirate bureau) claims they (APB) mainly acted against this obviously not illegal organisation, quite pleased that they got shut down as well.

      And since then the parliamentary Constitutional Committee has been asked to investigate justice minister Thomas Bodström and others in office (The Local). After being swamped by reports the chief of the JO (persons who investigates wrongdoings in the justice system) have decided to investigate the entire raid, everyone involved in it and any illegal pressure applied.

      Today two demonstration occurred in Sweden, organised by piratbyrån, piratpartiet and some youth organisations from the established political parties.
    16. Re:Examples Please! by spongman · · Score: 2, Interesting
      the part that interests me the most is the reports that they were denied lawyers because there wasn't a possibility of a prison sentance, but that they were forced to provde DNA samples becuase, wait for it... there was possibility of a prison sentance.

      Sounds like a law's being broken in Sweden, and it's not copyright...

    17. Re:Examples Please! by kwandar · · Score: 1

      Mind telling us about the demonstration, size, etc?

    18. Re:Examples Please! by Thing+1 · · Score: 1
      The bad part is that someone have DoS:ed the Swedish police's website, which has been giving the pirates a really bad name, and has made the "threat" of these sort of attacks against the government and media the latest target of media fearmongering.

      Likely it was the MPAA, as a diversionary tactic.

      --
      I feel fantastic, and I'm still alive.
    19. Re:Examples Please! by Magnus+Reftel · · Score: 1
      The swedish national TV station (funded by every household with a TV) ran a story based on an informant, basicly saying that the minister of justice was running errands for the white house.
      Something that is easily missed by those not familiar with the Swedish system is that this is pretty serious even without the US connection. Ministers are not allowed to involve themselves with specific cases here. If Bodström did that, then this may be a opportunity to get rid of him without switching the whole administration.
      --
      print "Yet another p{erl,ython} hacker\n",
    20. Re:Examples Please! by Graabein · · Score: 1

      I just saw a newscast on Swedish TV-channel TV4. Looks like the news coverage has turned from how this is a pretty bad political and judicial scandal into how the Swedish Government web site was taken down by a DoS attack by terrorist pirate hackers.

      Way to go guys!

      --
      And remember kids: Never trust a computer you can actually lift.
  7. Good news by Supersonic1425 · · Score: 1

    A lot of the site doesn't work right (I just tried downloading two .torrents and got a nice 404 for each of them), but it's good that it's making progress to come back online. Hopefully it won't be too long before they're back to normal. Whether that's in Sweden or another country doesn't really matter too much for the average user, but I hope it's Sweden if only for pride.

    1. Re:Good news by MarkByers · · Score: 1

      The search function doesn't seem to be working yet either:

      No hits due to politics

      The search function will be back later today.

      --
      I'll probably be modded down for this...
  8. Location of servers... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    From the IRC channel, it sounds like the new servers are located in the Netherlands with hot backups running in Ukraine. The MPAA just got rocked. If it wasn't so damn early, I'd drink to this news...

    1. Re:Location of servers... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Somebody hand the **AA the Dune books and the sections about the Sandtrout and Sandworms -- especially God Emperor of Dune. Better not awaken the sleeper.

    2. Re:Location of servers... by thelost · · Score: 5, Funny

      a true pirate starts drinking before the sun hits the yard-arm. yarrrr

      --
      Promote Charity on Myspace, Show Your Colours!
    3. Re:Location of servers... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny
      If it wasn't so damn early, I'd drink to this news...

      It's never too early to drink :^)

    4. Re:Location of servers... by Anonymous+Brave+Guy · · Score: 1

      It's funny how everyone jeers that big media was smug too soon, yet within only a few hours of the new version of TPB going up.

      What makes you think big media won't immediately slap takedown notices on the new versions and their operators as well, and wind up with a few more of the people involved arrested?

      --
      If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
    5. Re:Location of servers... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm sure they'll understand the subtlety...

    6. Re:Location of servers... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If I recall correctly, their own press release says it took them since "2004" to get this raid done.

    7. Re:Location of servers... by tmckay87 · · Score: 1

      it's noon somewhere!

    8. Re:Location of servers... by forceflow307 · · Score: 1

      it's five oclock somewhere ;)

    9. Re:Location of servers... by deltatype0 · · Score: 1

      Reminds me of a Starcraft game I played with a friend where he took out my main Terran base but forgot about the 10-12 other HQ's I was floating around. Each time he'd take out one, I'd build about 4 more. This lasted a good half hour before I ran out of resources.

    10. Re:Location of servers... by Nqdiddles · · Score: 1

      Damn right it's never too early!

      It's shortly after 6am here on the East Coast of Australia, but in the interests of supporting pirates (and therefore fighting global warming, of course) I'm cracking open a cold one. Out of obligation, naturally. :)

      Cheers!

      --
      And that kids is how I met your mother.
    11. Re:Location of servers... by TooMuchToDo · · Score: 1
      Best. Comment. Ever.


      *opens bottle of booze*

    12. Re:Location of servers... by muellerr1 · · Score: 1

      Which is why decreasing the number of pirates increases global temperatures. Hoist those albedo-increasing sails, mateys!

    13. Re:Location of servers... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, I seriously doubt they will have enough bandwidth in Ukraine to handle such traffic... LoL

      I am Ukrainian (BTW :-)

  9. Amazing! by Sj0 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If it's turning into a major scandal, could this mean that people in Sweden generally don't think gestapo-like tactics are justified to take down a few people downloading video games and TV shows?

    Next thing you know, you'll be telling us that talking about war isn't actually talking about peace, and that freedom isn't actually slavery.

    --
    It's been a long time.
    1. Re:Amazing! by masklinn · · Score: 3, Funny

      Next thing you know, you'll be telling us that talking about war isn't actually talking about peace.

      God damn it, do you mean that fucking for virginity doesn't work either?

      --
      "The way we can tell it's C# instead of Haskell is because it's nine lines instead of two." -- wadler
    2. Re:Amazing! by skrolle2 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Usually when the police over here is covered in media, they are complaining about lack of funds, there are too few policemen, minor crimes go uninvestigated, and the general feeling is that the police doesn't do its job.

      And now the police did a large-scale raid, not against drug smugglers, traffickers or other organized crime which people actually care about, but against file-sharers. As a result of a direct order from the minister of justice (who btw is not allowed to do that), and as a result of pressure from a foreign power.

      So we have a situation where the police doesn't have manpower to do what people want, but when the US wants to shutdown a legal Swedish site, there's suddenly plenty of resources available. THIS pisses people off enormously. The average Joe couldn't care less about copyright or filesharing or the Pirate Bay, but this blatant misuse of the police is something a lot of people care about.

    3. Re:Amazing! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Do you have a better way of making more virgins?

      (Sorry, can't give proper credit, don't know who came up with it.)

    4. Re:Amazing! by Xemu · · Score: 3, Interesting
      Usually when the police over here is covered in media, they are complaining about lack of funds, there are too few policemen, minor crimes go uninvestigated, and the general feeling is that the police doesn't do its job.


      Apparently child porn creators and distributors are enjoying their freedom because of the raid.

      There are very few (much less than 50) Swedish policemen with proper IT-investigation skills.

      One of the more disturbing news reports relating to the PirateBay raid is that out of the 50 policemen used in the raid, several were pulled out of ongoing child porn investigations, causing these child abusers to roam free longer.

      Now, that is very offensive to most civilians, as there is consensus that child porn distribution on the internet is a much more severe crime than copyright infringement of anything.

      --
      Tell your friends about xenu.net
    5. Re:Amazing! by mapkinase · · Score: 1

      In other news:
      - Policeman in Manhattan was helping an old grandma to walk across the street instead going undercover to dig some dirt on Enronese family.

      --
      I do not believe in karma. "Funny"=-6. Do good and forbid evil. Yours, Oft-Offtopic Flamebaiting Troll.
    6. Re:Amazing! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thank God, the voice of reason! Please, won't somebody just think of the children?!

    7. Re:Amazing! by Surt · · Score: 4, Funny

      God damn it, do you mean that fucking for virginity doesn't work either?

      Actually, I am pleased to inform you that fucking is in fact how all virgins throughout all of history were produced. Stay the course!

      --
      "Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking
    8. Re:Amazing! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What amazes me is that, of all countries, this happened in Sweden. I mean Sweden is the country that staid neutral in WWII.

    9. Re:Amazing! by phauxfinnish · · Score: 3, Funny

      there is consensus that child porn distribution on the internet is a much more severe crime than copyright infringement of anything.

      What about copyright infringment of child porn?

    10. Re:Amazing! by arose · · Score: 1

      People who are involved in child porn think a lot about children...

      --
      Analogies don't equal equalities, they are merely somewhat analogous.
    11. Re:Amazing! by jrumney · · Score: 1
      And now the police did a large-scale raid, not against drug smugglers, traffickers or other organized crime which people actually care about, but against file-sharers.

      Apparently you haven't watched the compulsary intro to any MPAA released DVD recently, or you'd know that PIRACY FUNDS TERRORISM!!!

    12. Re:Amazing! by Sj0 · · Score: 1

      Then you end up with what we like to call a "Mexican standoff".

      --
      It's been a long time.
    13. Re:Amazing! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Until recently...

      Artificial insemination and all.

    14. Re:Amazing! by Surt · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I'm sorry for the technical innacuracy. I thought about it a little, but decided that the post was funnier overall without the side trip into technical disclaimers.

      --
      "Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking
    15. Re:Amazing! by idonthack · · Score: 1

      Since it's illegal for it to exist, I don't think it's copyrightable.

      --
      Why is it that when you believe something it's an opinion, but when I believe something it's a manifesto?
  10. CCTV footage from the raid.. by scredda · · Score: 5, Informative

    ..is available at YouTube. For some reason the police covered the cameras with plastic bags halfway through.

    1. Re:CCTV footage from the raid.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful
      For some reason the police covered the cameras with plastic bags halfway through.

      Why would they do that? Do they have something to hide!?
    2. Re:CCTV footage from the raid.. by Jackie_Chan_Fan · · Score: 1

      When will YouTube be raided? They have tons of copyrighted movies, often overseas films but they're still copyrighted are they not?

      I'm hoping YouTube gets raided soon. Infact how about Google video, Google Search, Myspace and Yahoo. Thats a start.

    3. Re:CCTV footage from the raid.. by ocelotbob · · Score: 1

      The difference is cooperation. The examples you mentioned all cooperate when takedown notices are served; the law states that as a hosting provider, you're off the hook as long as you meet certain criteria. TPB, OTOH, didn't comply, thus, are treated more harshly.

      --

      Marxism is the opiate of dumbasses

    4. Re:CCTV footage from the raid.. by Buran · · Score: 1

      And the DMCA doesn't apply in Sweden, in case you hadn't noticed.

  11. Thank you, Sweden! by Atario · · Score: 4, Insightful

    As an American who's disgusted with the current Copyright Cabal running roughshod all over everyone and everything, I'm glad there's somewhere in the world where this crap inspires the mainstream rage it should. GO GET 'EM.

    What's it like in Sweden? What's a nice time of year to visit? Are there programmer jobs available? Do you still have that bikini team?

    Be seeing you...

    --
    "A great democracy must be progressive or it will soon cease to be a great democracy." --Theodore Roosevelt
    1. Re:Thank you, Sweden! by Dr.+Cody · · Score: 5, Funny

      Sorry, all those gorgeous blonde women are in their 40's. Nowadays, all we have left is chubby girls who look like raccoons.

    2. Re:Thank you, Sweden! by geneshifter · · Score: 1

      "Be seeing you..."

      Too much Oblivion I see

    3. Re:Thank you, Sweden! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The only nice time of year to visit is summer. Otherwise it's goodamn cold. Programmer jobs are available, welcome and wanted, but you'll earn more as a plumber. (not that it's a bad salary, simply IT is not the sector with MOST demand for workers.) No idea about bikini teams, but vast areas of land, very cheap, meaning mares are cheap, easy to buy and keep and willing. And get a swedish girl drunk (not cheap but easy) and you'll get laid too. The worst drawback: Outrageous prices of booze.

    4. Re:Thank you, Sweden! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or 'The Prisoner', of course.

    5. Re:Thank you, Sweden! by colganc · · Score: 1

      Why would you want "maintstream rage"? People running around like gangs and angry mobs generally isn't productive. Good thing they don't seem to be angry mobs and actually have something at least some what planned out. For example the political party they are working on.

    6. Re:Thank you, Sweden! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      What's it like in Sweden? What's a nice time of year to visit?

      Everyone knows English, so there are no problems for a foreigner to make himself understood.

      I'd say you should visit Sweden in late spring or summer. The Swedish girls (who are just as hot as the rumors say) are very keen on putting on really short skirts and revealing tops as soon as the sun comes out.

      On the geek side, Sweden is well equipped too, particularly in the larger cities (like Stockholm and Gothenburg). Lots of Internet cafés, gaming stores etc.
    7. Re:Thank you, Sweden! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What's it like in Sweden?

      Wi n0t trei a h0liday in Sweden thi yer?

      See the l0veli lakes

      The W0nderful teleph0ne system

      And mani interesting furry animals

      Including the majestic m00se

      A M00se once bit my sister ...

      Mynd you, m00se bites Kan be pretty nasti ...

      (We apologize for the Monty Python reference. The poster of this message has just been sacked).

    8. Re:Thank you, Sweden! by MikeBabcock · · Score: 1

      Actually, in a real democracy it often is very productive. One of the few things almost all governments agree on is "keeping the peace". In a democratic country, a large uprising demands attention (at least from SWAT teams) but often reminds politians which side their bread is buttered on.

      --
      - Michael T. Babcock (Yes, I blog)
    9. Re:Thank you, Sweden! by colganc · · Score: 1

      In a real democracy it isn't needed. People organize political parties and those parties change law. If there is a political class then you can't just vote in people with the same view as you and you are left with other choices such as protesting.

    10. Re:Thank you, Sweden! by Hinhule · · Score: 1

      Weather is pretty much like Montana (lived there for 10 months).

      Gas is quite expensive ~1.7USD / Litre.

      I like it.

    11. Re:Thank you, Sweden! by geodescent · · Score: 1

      We're not far off though! $3 USD per gallon (3.78 liter) in Texas

    12. Re:Thank you, Sweden! by KimmoA · · Score: 0

      Wanna swap places? I hate it here. :/

    13. Re:Thank you, Sweden! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Anytime of the year is good, but winter is cold. It helps alot to have friends there, especially if you can stay at their place. Also, knowing Swedes means seeing Swedish more like Swedes enjoy it and not as a tour from a company. It isnt as easy to backpack as France, but many places are very bike friendly.

      I visited Vasteras and all of my friends could speak fluent English as could almost all under 35, which now would mean almost all under 40. Gas is expensive and so is liquor. But dont worry, if you have friends there you can easily find high quality moonshine and bypass the high price of liquor at the stores (extreme taxes). I think they call it Home Burnt (english translation as I dont remember Swedish word) and it comes in various qualities which any college student will know where to get the good qualities.

      I didnt see the Swedish Bikini Team. Most of my friends there are very geek like. I met them playing a MUD that is based at one of the colleges there http://www.genesismud.org/ . Many Europeans play it, though it has lost numbers since the rise of MMORPGS.

      Oh and dont forget to do the Swedish version of Kissing the Blarney Stone. You have to eat some rotten tasting raw(?) fish ..... tasted so bad I had to gag it down (and I love sushi) while your Swedish friends just laugh their asses off at you.

      P.S. Never kiss the Blarney Stone, the Irish piss on it as a joke and love to see you kiss it or so I have heard :)

    14. Re:Thank you, Sweden! by Rogerborg · · Score: 1

      Let's play a game. It's called "For every instance of a democratic government increasing freedom without angry mobs being involved, I'll cite five examples of a democratic government decreasing freedom." Catchy, eh? You go first.

      --
      If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
    15. Re:Thank you, Sweden! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We're not far off though! $3 USD per gallon (3.78 liter) in Texas
      That's still less than half the price... not quite "not far off"!

      $3/gallon -> $3/3.78 liters -> 0.79$/litre

    16. Re:Thank you, Sweden! by colganc · · Score: 1

      I did not mention freedom, only change.

    17. Re:Thank you, Sweden! by isecore · · Score: 1

      What's it like in Sweden?

      South of Sweden is pretty nice and temperate. Kinda like Ohio but without the humidity. North of Sweden (where I live) has beautiful nice and surprisingly warm summers, as well as endless woods and gorgeous scenery. People are generally kind and tolerant, gas is insanely expensive, etc etc. Actually it's very similar to the US in all the good ways and not so much in all the bad ways. Hamburgers, drivethrough, Mcdonalds etc.

      Come in the summer, you can stay at me + my girlfriends place in our guestroom. Hook up to our 10mbit LAN connection (100mbit in November) and just chill. No problem.

      --
      I enjoy large posteriors and I cannot prevaricate.
    18. Re:Thank you, Sweden! by Richard+Frost · · Score: 2, Funny

      Come in the summer, you can stay at me + my girlfriends place in our guestroom. Hook up to our 10mbit LAN connection (100mbit in November) and just chill. No problem.

      What some slashdotters won't do to brag over the fact that they have girlfriends...

    19. Re:Thank you, Sweden! by BobSutan · · Score: 1

      FYI, the bikini team were all American actresses wearing wigs.

      --
      "On a scale from 1 to 10, people are stupid"
    20. Re:Thank you, Sweden! by esper · · Score: 1

      Nøw yøu just need tø be intrøduced tø the "ø" HTML element...

    21. Re:Thank you, Sweden! by NoMaster · · Score: 4, Funny
      Nowadays, all we have left is chubby girls who look like raccoons.
      Pics?

      --
      What part of "a well regulated militia" do you not understand?
    22. Re:Thank you, Sweden! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Unfortunately for you, Swedish uses ö instead of ø. It's the Danes and Norwegians that use ø

    23. Re:Thank you, Sweden! by frank_adrian314159 · · Score: 3, Funny
      all we have left is chubby girls who look like raccoons

      That'll do for Shlashdotters.

      --
      That is all.
    24. Re:Thank you, Sweden! by Dr.+Cody · · Score: 0
    25. Re:Thank you, Sweden! by Darby · · Score: 1

      Wanna swap places? I hate it here. :/

      So the Møøse bites really are that bad, huh?

    26. Re:Thank you, Sweden! by Lost+Race · · Score: 1

      Döh!

    27. Re:Thank you, Sweden! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nice investigative work there, Bob.

    28. Re:Thank you, Sweden! by chris_7d0h · · Score: 1

      There are pros and cons as with every place on earth.

      Socially
      The most obnoxious trait is social segregation, where people with similar views and income tend to run (almost exclusively) in the same circles. Sticking out (of the crowd) is frowned upon. If your a social chameleon, then you'd have little trouble hanging with different crowds though.

      There is also another odd trait called "Svensson syndromet" (The syndrome of the average Swede), which has traditionally been described as a manifestation of despising success (i.e. jealousy). However, in reality I've observed it's more specific, a rage against seemingly undue awarding (e.g. seeing or reading about someone making, to the observer, an unfair amount of money). Many times this is due to lack of understanding regarding what the job of the successful person really entails. An example of the manifestation might be the huge salaries awarded certain corporate directors and especially in times of controversy, such as when Ericsson fired tens of thousands of people while the board of directors and president of operation awarded themselves huge bonuses and salary increases.

      Otherwise, most people have a "I don't take any crap from you" mentality which stretches all the way from private to corporate life (causing some degree of inconvenience in local branches of multi-national cops. where the management find it difficult to follow the "manager's handbook"). This however has led to an overall climate of respect for individuals (instead of seen as pawns, resource numbers and the like).

      Politically
      There is a general chasm between the opinion and values of politicians of the major parties and the general public. Also, the politicians are not afraid of ignoring any and most promises made before an election after the election. Unfortunately, this blatant ignorance of public values are shared between the two major political blocks and most people tend to vote on either side out of tradition. This voting behavior means that politicians can lie and trample the will of the people again and again while still only facing a minor risk of not being re-elected to office. Even if they were to fail *one* re-election campaign, they still pull enough clout to continue their own agenda as a major body in the Swedish version of the "house of representatives".

      In the last 5 years, the political climate has quickly deteriorated as a consequence of heavy lobbying from American interests either directly or indirectly (through the EU). Seeing as Sweden is a small country ruled by politicians who traditionally have had to fear very little for consequences of their actions (as described above), the government has very quickly bowed down to outside pressure by the Americans and the EU. However, I feel the population is very close to a breaking point right now with a lot of external values imposed on them within a a short time span, without their consent or having been advised so likely "something" will happen (or erupt) within a few years to restore the original values of Sweden with regards to freedom and respect.

      Income
      Moving here temporarily would likely be a bit of set back economically for someone moving from the US, since the economy is tailored towards those spending a long time in the country (preferably from birth to death). This is due to the relatively high taxes used to distribute the wealth. The idea underlying the economy is still "Government knows best" and as such certain social attributes have been identified and sponsored by the state, such as subsidized kinder garden, free college, almost no toll roads, pension system for all, subsidized health care, limit on medical expenses (a maximum amount you need to spend per year on medicine, after that it's free) and so on. If you are in a situation in life where you don't have a need for those benefits, then you'll be getting a more sour deal than the model citizen the system was designed for. In such a situation, the US system with "pay everything yourself from you

      --
      In a society that believes in nothing, fear becomes the only agenda ~ Bill Durodié
    29. Re:Thank you, Sweden! by merreborn · · Score: 2, Funny

      "Be seeing you..."

      Too much Oblivion I see

      Or 'The Prisoner', of course.


      It's always sad when kids mistake a reference to a reference for a reference to an original.

      It's like, bad pointer arithmatic, or something.

    30. Re:Thank you, Sweden! by sh4na · · Score: 1

      Røfl! Oh man, when are my möd points when I need them? if only it were possible to mod a thread... :p

      --
      shana
      ......gone crazy, back soon, leave message
    31. Re:Thank you, Sweden! by Xyde · · Score: 1

      A Møøse once bit my sister...

    32. Re:Thank you, Sweden! by ocelotbob · · Score: 1

      I think this is one: mmmm, coonass

      --

      Marxism is the opiate of dumbasses

    33. Re:Thank you, Sweden! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wikipedia FTW!

    34. Re:Thank you, Sweden! by init100 · · Score: 1

      Gas is quite expensive ~1.7USD / Litre.

      But since we have quite extensive public transportation, you won't be trapped if you don't have a car which you can be in the US (except on the east coast).

    35. Re:Thank you, Sweden! by init100 · · Score: 1

      25% VAT (average, some specialty items have lower percentages and some higher).

      This is incorrect. The maximum VAT is 25%, but some items have certain extra taxes applied to them. Examples are gasoline, tobacco and alcohol. These taxes are meant to reduce consumption of such wares.

    36. Re:Thank you, Sweden! by esper · · Score: 1

      ...unless the "Swedish" is written by Møntÿ Pÿthøn.

    37. Re:Thank you, Sweden! by Rogerborg · · Score: 1

      Well, aren't you just the little prissy pants. You lost. Move on.

      --
      If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
  12. Demonstrations by hanssprudel · · Score: 5, Informative

    There will be demonstrations in Sweden's largest cities this afternoon, condeming the actions of the Swedish police and department of justice in this matter. It is being co-organized by the Pirate Party, and the youth organizations of several mainstream parties from across the political spectrum.

    In Stockholm it starts at 15:00 on Mynttorget (right by parlament). That is in 15 minutes so hurry!

    In Gothenburg a demonstration will start at 16:30 on Gustav Adolfs Torg.

    1. Re:Demonstrations by mkro · · Score: 4, Informative

      And if you agree with what they are doing and want to support them, here is the donation link. SMS donations work from several countries, and makes giving a few bucks quite hassle free. I did, and feel way better than after buying a ring tone this way.

      --
      I shall go and tell the indestructible man that someone plans to murder him.
    2. Re:Demonstrations by Tom · · Score: 1

      There will be demonstrations in Sweden's largest cities this afternoon

      Please post torrent of pictures!

      --
      Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
    3. Re:Demonstrations by Janek+Kozicki · · Score: 1

      I've just sent SMS. It feels good :)

      --
      #
      #\ @ ? Colonize Mars
      #
    4. Re:Demonstrations by erikdalen · · Score: 1
      --
      Erik Dalén
    5. Re:Demonstrations by erikdalen · · Score: 1
      Problem connecting to tracker - timeout exceeded



      perhaps I'll need to use something else than pirate bay. we'll see.

      --
      Erik Dalén
    6. Re:Demonstrations by erikdalen · · Score: 1

      Torrent with pictures from Stockholm:

      http://rebeltorrent.net/details.php?id=420

      --
      Erik Dalén
    7. Re:Demonstrations by SilentChris · · Score: 1

      If the purpose of pirating stuff is to get it for free, who on earth is donating? Strange priorities.

    8. Re:Demonstrations by Husgaard · · Score: 1
      Pictures from one of the demonstrations are now on the net.

      And the second swedish TV channel has been reported to cover the demonstration on national TV.

    9. Re:Demonstrations by esper · · Score: 1

      Or perhaps you have misunderstoon piratpartiet's goals... I get the distinct impression that they're more interested in freedom than simply getting things for free.

    10. Re:Demonstrations by SilentChris · · Score: 1

      I've read their party platform. I don't see anything about freedom. I see a lot of stuff about not wanting to bow to the US, which seems more popular and fashionable than noteworthy.

    11. Re:Demonstrations by esper · · Score: 1

      Fair enough. It's also possible that, since I agree with what they want to accomplish, I may have projected my reasons onto them.

    12. Re:Demonstrations by mkro · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Well, I'm also reading a lot of freedom into this page in English. Now, even though Piratpartiet and The Pirate Pay is not the same organization, a lot of their goals are touted as common. It could of course be that the only reason The Pirate Bay exists is banner money, but if they open people's eyes to Piratpartiet, that is a-okay by me.

      --
      I shall go and tell the indestructible man that someone plans to murder him.
    13. Re:Demonstrations by Darby · · Score: 4, Informative

      I don't see anything about freedom. I see a lot of stuff about not wanting to bow to the US,

      Wow, it's right there staring you in the face. Or, do you have some bizarre definition of freedom?

    14. Re:Demonstrations by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      In Gothenburg a demonstration will start at 16:30 on Gustav Adolfs Torg.


      Don't get shot!
    15. Re:Demonstrations by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've read their party platform. I don't see anything about freedom. I see a lot of stuff about not wanting to bow to the US

      Me neither. Ignorance is strength, war is peace and freedom is bowing to the US.

    16. Re:Demonstrations by darkgray · · Score: 1

      I attended the event in Stockholm and shot some pictures, if anyone's wondering what it was like: http://foto.muri.se/piracy/

      It was very peaceful, very dull, and a bit loud to stand next to the speaker. The police was more concerned with people standing in the middle of the road than any violence breaking out, which probably says something for this particular type of "crime".

    17. Re:Demonstrations by ocelotbob · · Score: 1

      Well, talking to people in sweden, it seems more that the supporters are whiny children who want stuff for free than anything else. They appreciate some of the works, yet don't want to pay for supporting a "corrupt" system. Most pirate party members don't have the guts to support actual means of change like boycotts, and instead will continue keeping Hollywood relevant through propogating their memes, all the while claiming to be sticking it to the man. Childish hypocrites, the lot of them.

      --

      Marxism is the opiate of dumbasses

    18. Re:Demonstrations by Darby · · Score: 1


      Well, talking to people in sweden, it seems more that the supporters are whiny children who want stuff for free than anything else. They appreciate some of the works, yet don't want to pay for supporting a "corrupt" system. Most pirate party members don't have the guts to support actual means of change like boycotts, and instead will continue keeping Hollywood relevant through propogating their memes, all the while claiming to be sticking it to the man. Childish hypocrites, the lot of them.


      Well, not having talked with people in Sweden in a number of years, I have no worthwhile opinion on all of that.
      The extreme sillyness of that particular juxtaposition above was all that set off my ludicrousometer ;-)

  13. ARRRR!! by fernandoh26 · · Score: -1, Redundant

    Yo ho ho ho, a PIRATE'S LIFE FOR ME!
    *dances a merry jig*

    Umm wait a minute, do pirate's dance merry jigs? =P

    --
    Chums up, let's do this!
    1. Re:ARRRR!! by Vo0k · · Score: 1

      They do! With merry beautiful women from the carribean isles!
      And then they claim their part of booty!

      --
      Anagram("United States of America") == "Dine out, taste a Mac, fries"
    2. Re:ARRRR!! by Epsillon · · Score: 3, Funny
      Umm wait a minute, do pirate's dance merry jigs? =P
      Possibly not, but certain law-enforcement agencies may do, especially when they shoot themselves in the foot this many times...

      Nice feral apostrophe, by the way. Haven't seen one of those for a while.
      --
      Resistance is futile. Reactance buggers it up.
    3. Re:ARRRR!! by fernandoh26 · · Score: 0

      OMGWTFBBQ?!1! I'm normally a stickler for that kinda stuff, I can't believe I let one through....

      --
      Chums up, let's do this!
    4. Re:ARRRR!! by Epsillon · · Score: 1

      Sorry, I'm not usually a grammar nazi (although my pet hate is currently coworkers. Those people should be reported to the SCPA) but I just love the term "feral apostrophe" ;-)

      --
      Resistance is futile. Reactance buggers it up.
    5. Re:ARRRR!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ITYM SPCA.

    6. Re:ARRRR!! by Epsillon · · Score: 1

      Rule #1 of being a grammar nazi, friend. Point out others' mistakes and make a more stupid one yourself...

      --
      Resistance is futile. Reactance buggers it up.
  14. How many.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    ..cops does it take to change a light bulb?
    50. One to do it and 49 to confiscate every other light bulb in the house as evidence.

    1. Re:How many.. by RobertLTux · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      but you forgot the 15 CSIs that are needed to find out why the original bulb went out.

      --
      Any person using FTFY or editing my postings agrees to a US$50.00 charge
    2. Re:How many.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You forgot the cops needed to cover up the cameras, so no one actually sees them take the lightbulbs.

    3. Re:How many.. by wharlie · · Score: 1

      No one knows because they cover the cameras before changing the lightbulb.

  15. Two political parties have alread filed complaints by DaveRexel · · Score: 5, Informative

    Representatives from two major political parties in Sweden, Folkpartiet and Vänsterpartiet have filed formal complaints against the Minister of Justice and members of his staff.

    This has increased the general publics awareness of The Pirate Bay and probably increased the number of p2p users.

    A very nice shot in the foot for the Swedish Justice Dept., the police and our very "customer friendly" **AA organisations.

    --
    # ~: no sigs today
  16. A little glimpse from the Danish media by Reverse+Gear · · Score: 1

    Well I am not from Sweden but I can tell as much as this has made it to some of the big radio stations here in Denmark (P3 which I am listening to right now), which means that things are pretty big in Sweden for them to make the headlines in Denmark.
    So far a quick overlook over the big media here tells me what attracts the most attention in Danish media is the demonstration that is on it's way right now in Stockholm and the talks abuot the Swedish government acting after orders from the USA with politicans bypassing Swedish laws.

    1. Re:A little glimpse from the Danish media by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Seeing Swedish policians jailed for treason ( for ignoring the laws and sovreignty of their own nation and unlawfully ceding power to a foreign authority or nation like the US ), police jailed for theft, trespassing, false arrest and imprisonment, and the local RIAA-equivalent members jailed for perjury, making false statements to police, and barratry would be a great thing.

      They have gotten away with utterly reprehensible, corrupt and criminal behaviour for far too long, it is a global crime empire that needs to be hunted down and eliminated - there should be no safe haven or refuge for these bastards.

  17. Reverse psychology anyone? by clux · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Great going swedish police. If these failed publicity stunts keep happening, the pirate party in sweden will win the election by 2010, and we will have an ice age by 2050.

    1. Re:Reverse psychology anyone? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Looks like the mods don't get the reference...

    2. Re:Reverse psychology anyone? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Looks like the mods don't get the reference..."

      Seems that most /. mods don't get ANYTHING. You can always tell when the script kiddies, game lamers, fanboys, and 13-year-olds in the basement have mod points--which seems to be WAY too often.

  18. a podcast with one of the admins available by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There is a podcast available by the Chaos Computer Club : http://www.ccc.de/updates/2006/chaosradio-pirate-b ay?language=de This podcast, done yesterday, has an extensive interview with one of the admins of thepiratebay on the police raid and the future of TPB.

  19. not to sound like a party pooper by circletimessquare · · Score: 4, Insightful

    but if they are in the netherlands now, what is to stop the dutch police from doing the same thing?

    yeah sure, it's a giant game of whack-a-mole, but isn't the lesson here to do to thepiratebay what was done to napster?

    that is, when the riaa/ mpaa behead these entities, they go underground and become headless

    that is: no central server. thus, napster morphed into morpheus, kazaa, edonkey, et al

    which is the real lesson for the mpaa/ riaa: you don't kill this "infection", you only make is more resistant to your antibiotics

    the mpaa/ riaa is breeding superpiracy

    you would think that instead they would coopt the pirate bay, legitimize it

    but no, they have to fight where it would be wiser to collude. they just breed a stronger foe, drive this behavior further underground, and not stop one bit of it, and just make it much more difficult to ever stop

    their behavior is creating the culture of piracy. if they embraced and extended, instead of exterminate and berserk, the mpaa/ riaa would create a culture that would say "hey, this stuff is cheap, and high quality, and easily organized... why would i want to go to a bad quality copy of my media that is hard to find?"

    surely they see that that is all they are doing, no?

    they are digging their own graves

    you can't fight technological progress

    this genie is not going back in the bottle

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    1. Re:not to sound like a party pooper by Teun · · Score: 2, Informative
      but if they are in the netherlands now, what is to stop the dutch police from doing the same thing?

      The law.
      And historical lessons, they show Dutch police first collects evidence with the aid of good old 'dd'.
      Meaning generaly they leave the computers, servers and desktops, running untill at a later time the collected evidence could be used to actually shut down the operation being investigated.

      'Just' a complaint from a private party is not enough to get an immediate shut down.

      --
      "The likes of Facebook and WhatsApp are free to those whose privacy is of zero value."
    2. Re:not to sound like a party pooper by Cal+Paterson · · Score: 1

      that is, when the riaa/ mpaa behead these entities, they go underground and become headless

      Piracy has been underground too long. It's time fix the law.

    3. Re:not to sound like a party pooper by elpapacito · · Score: 1

      surely they see that that is all they are doing, no?

      Some do, some don't. What do they have in common ? They still think repression and fearmongering works.

      To an extent and for a period of time it does work, but not on the long term. They probably tought people would take more years to adapt (like transition vhs->dvd) but it happening a lot faster, they lost control. Indeed acute observes may have notice the attempts aren't primarily on restoring the Fear of God on Copyright (but for stupid attempts like Capt.Copyright) but on taking control of the hardware and the distribution methods ; a pirate without a boat doesn't pirate much.

      Except that there in a historical period in which fearmongering (either by US/Western pundits or by terrorist) is being increasingly rejected by masses, tired of being told they should fear fear fear and respect people that don't feed them and don't help making their work life better.

    4. Re:not to sound like a party pooper by SargeantLobes · · Score: 1
      Copyright protection isn't a major political issue in the Netherlands. We've got two detectives (yes really, two) doing research on kiddie porn. So I doubt they will send fifty detectives them to one of the biggest providers in our country.

      I also think the people will be more concerned with other things that are happening on our country right now (e.g. perverts establishing their own political party). So there won't be any support for raids in our country either (and we've got elections in a year, and the minister of justice's part isn't doing well at all). Anti-americanism is probably just as wide-spread here as it is in Sweden.

      I doubt what thepiratebay is doing is illegal in our country, downloading is legal, uploading isn't. I don't know how torrents fit into that, but it isn't uploading, so...

      And several other big torrent sites (mininova, torrentspy) and non-torrent piracy sites (nforce.nl) are based here, and have been for a long time.

      So I doubt they will get raided anytime soon.

      --
      I do love "!" but not as much as I love "..."...
    5. Re:not to sound like a party pooper by m50d · · Score: 1

      There's no need to decentralize because what they're doing is perfectly legal. They just need foreign support until the investigation in Sweden finishes, then they'll be pretty much invulnerable (you would have to be very brave or stupid to try a second raid after the first finds nothing wrong).

      --
      I am trolling
    6. Re:not to sound like a party pooper by myspys · · Score: 1

      but if they are in the netherlands now, what is to stop the dutch police from doing the same thing?

      does it matter?
      they have a backup setup in ukraine and russia (or on their way at least)

      there are many countries that will support these people

      let the whack-a-mole competition begin!

  20. Moved to The Netherlands.... by tsvk · · Score: 3, Informative

    Judging from a traceroute, the servers seem now to be hosted in The Netherlands.

    I'm a bit surprised, when the admins of TPB said in Swedish media that they will relocate abroad, I actually thought that they would move outside the EU.

    Let's see how the Dutch officials will react to this; how long TPB will stay up before they try to take it down again.

    1. Re:Moved to The Netherlands.... by daff2k · · Score: 1

      I wonder if under the EUCD (the EU equivalent to the DMCA) providing links to "copyrighted material" is "illegal" as well?

      --
      And which parallel universe did you crawl out of?
    2. Re:Moved to The Netherlands.... by DDLKermit007 · · Score: 1

      Thier hot-backup is located in Russia. TPB would prefer to keep the servers in a country where one of the admins are I believe and the threat of backup in Russia so another raid won't happen b/c of US pressure. GL to the **AA's on getting a Russian server.

    3. Re:Moved to The Netherlands.... by wwmedia · · Score: 2, Interesting

      yes they hosted by leasewb now @ Schuberg-Philis datacenter in fact on same ip range as one of my servers! i sent a letter to my isp seeking assurances that one of my servers doesnt get taken away in the next raid like happened to people in sweden im happy that piratebay is sticking a finger up hollywoods arse but this move quite litterally puts them in same datacenter :( and this gets me worried

    4. Re:Moved to The Netherlands.... by BabyDriver · · Score: 1

      I could be mis-remebering but hasn't the Dutch courts ruled that linking to copyrighted material is not infringing? (as part of a Scientology lawsuit IIRC)

    5. Re:Moved to The Netherlands.... by Splab · · Score: 1

      Very interessting indeed - anyone from NL who knows the law there?

      My favorite torrent site is hosted there (not tpb).

    6. Re:Moved to The Netherlands.... by mik3-nl · · Score: 1

      I believe there's no court ruling as of yet that torrent linking is illegal. This is just a big grey area in the Dutch law. Standard IANAL stuff, but I try to keep up :-)

    7. Re:Moved to The Netherlands.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Not as part of the Scientology/Spaink ruling (that was about freedom of speech being more important than copyright in some cases), but in the Kazaa case.

    8. Re:Moved to The Netherlands.... by rylin · · Score: 1

      I have servers in the same DC (BGC, Stockholm) where the videos were taken; literally a rack adjacent to the TPB rack.
      They only took that one rack from BGC, but the PRQ DC is another matter entirely.. that's where they went berserk and took everything.

      That said, connectivity at BGC went up and down like a yoyo during the bust.. I was not a happy camper, but realized I couldn't really do anything by going there.
      Servers are still up and running :)

    9. Re:Moved to The Netherlands.... by illuminatedwax · · Score: 1

      The Netherworld!?! Is Beetlejuice hosting the servers now?

      --
      Did you ever notice that *nix doesn't even cover Linux?
    10. Re:Moved to The Netherlands.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      More specifically it is hosted at Leaseweb. It's no secret that almost every major torrent indexing site is hosted there. There have been indexing sites takin down there such as torrentit.com and I wanna say Elitetorrents.org was hosted there as well.

  21. Pirate Bay admin interviewed (in English) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    In Chaosradio International #009 one of the maintainers of TPB called "Peter" mentions traffic data and server capability of TPB and also comments on the Pirate Bay induced traffic on the Swedish part of the internet. According to Peter, each of the Pirate Bay high end servers handles about 20000 connections per second. This kind of packet flow once brought the main router of one of the biggest Swedish internet service providers to its knees. The traffic volume to and from the Pirate Bay actually isn't very high, just a couple of gigabits per second. The induced traffic between the peers allegedly reaches 50% of the total Swedish internet traffic. Swedes can get 1Gbps connections to their homes and don't have to pay an arm and a leg for it. 100Mbps is quite common.

    The interview also covers the political environment and the internet culture of Sweden, and of course the raid.

    1. Re:Pirate Bay admin interviewed (in English) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      No, sorry. Sweden isn't the land of (bandwidth) milk and honey. 100mbps is available to home users, but not that common. 10mbps is though, at least in the major urban areas. Haven't heard about ANYONE having a 1gbps line at home though! My 10mbps line costs around $40-$50 a month.

    2. Re:Pirate Bay admin interviewed (in English) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I suppose it depends on the region. (And btw, 10Mbps for $50 a month flat does look like a land of milk and honey to some of us...)

    3. Re:Pirate Bay admin interviewed (in English) by rylin · · Score: 1

      Central Stockholm (our capitol, for those of you who still think Copenhagen is our capitol) offers 100/10Mbps, but it's far from being available everywhere in stockholm.
      I'd venture a guess that perhaps 5% of the people in Stockholm can get 100/10.

      On the other hand, a very small number of apartments near a few of the universities (Lund?) do have gigabit pipes, but that's more akin to saying Internet2 is available all over America.

    4. Re:Pirate Bay admin interviewed (in English) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, I live in Stockholm have 100mbps for $45 a month. It's pretty cheap compared to most of the world.

    5. Re:Pirate Bay admin interviewed (in English) by Sepper · · Score: 1
      And btw, 10Mbps for $50 a month flat does look like a land of milk and honey to some of us
      I can get something similar in Montreal... It's 65CAD = 59USD for 10Mbps Unlimited... Of course, that is only the Maximum connection... the actual speed may vary... and as everything else in North America, taxes are extra. So it's really 74CAD=67USD, which is not that far off
      --
      I live in Soviet Canuckistan you insensitive clod!
    6. Re:Pirate Bay admin interviewed (in English) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In Halifax, NS, we can get 10mbps connections for $55.95 +tax->$65CAD. If you buy it with your phone or cableTV service, it works out to much less. More like $45. Didn't think we were that privileged.
      http://eastlink.ca/internet/highspeed/index.asp

    7. Re:Pirate Bay admin interviewed (in English) by Jugalator · · Score: 1

      100mbps is available to home users, but not that common.

      Uh, where I live, in a small ass town in Sweden (far from large urban area), basically everyone in apartments can get 100 Mbps. Everyone that can get 10 Mbps should easily be able to get 100 Mbps, if you're talking the largest broadband provider in Sweden.

      --
      Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
    8. Re:Pirate Bay admin interviewed (in English) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Wow, your numbers about Stockholm are quite amazing!

      I live in a small town in northern Sweden of less than 50,000 inhabitans, and basically anyone in an apartment can get 100/10 Mbps for $44, and our local energy company distributes broadband for similar reasonable prices to many others in own houses. 5% sounds quite amazing, and I have to wonder if that's anywhere near correct, and not more like 50%. I mean, given how economics play a huge role here, and Stockholm should be waaay more profitable to support than far up in our town.

    9. Re:Pirate Bay admin interviewed (in English) by the-intersocialist · · Score: 1

      I get 10 mbps at 30$/mo and I live in a house owned by the state housing company, Svenska bostäder, which is the biggest landlord in Sweden. These numbers sound rather inflated though, because of the decreased value of us$ as compared to swedish SEK. 100 mbps would be about twice that sum and 30 mbps somewhere in between, but 10 mbps is enough for me.

    10. Re:Pirate Bay admin interviewed (in English) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My 100mbit/s connection costs me approximately $5 USD a month (it's added to the rent of the apartment).
      It's common in mid-sized univercity cities, I don't know about the larger cities such as Stockholm or Gothemburg though.

    11. Re:Pirate Bay admin interviewed (in English) by cnettel · · Score: 1

      True, if you're using their Ethernet-based, and not DSL. The only issue is that BBB wouldn't be a very significant player if you just counted their Ethernet installations. 8 Mbps is all I can get at any price not approaching the rent for the apartment...

    12. Re:Pirate Bay admin interviewed (in English) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      1Gbit connections aren't that common here in Sweden at all, in fact, as far as I know only cities with large universities have those speeds and even then it's only available to students and people working for the universities. 100Mbit is only common in large cities, most people in Sweden have ADSL-connections, usually 0.5Mbit, 1Mbit or 8Mbit

    13. Re:Pirate Bay admin interviewed (in English) by aliquis · · Score: 1

      And even then it's SHARED with a lot of other students, and probably 100mbps switches and shit anyway. Here in Örebro there are even a lot of 10mbps hubs, yeah, super fast Internet ftw.

      I've got 100/100 for 320sek/33.95 per month.

    14. Re:Pirate Bay admin interviewed (in English) by init100 · · Score: 1

      I have to wonder if that's anywhere near correct, and not more like 50%.

      No, I think it's fairly correct. The number might be 10%, but not much more and certainly not 50%. First, these speeds are only available in apartments with ethernet connections, while many landlords only care to install internet-capable cable-tv systems, and some even relies on people using ADSL. Second, ethernet connections are unavailable to all small (one household) houses, at least for reasonable amounts of money.

      And I do live in the Stockholm area, in an apartment.

  22. I'm laughing with tears by suv4x4 · · Score: 1

    You think I'm funny? Well screw ya, after this police campaign I love the pirate bay guys more than ever.

    They've turned from an underground torrent search engine to a symbol in the eyes of a lot of people.

    MPAA/RIAA you're pretty consistent in screwing up, I know it hurts, but don't worry, your end is near.

  23. The Swedish Chef Reports: by DrunkenTerror · · Score: 4, Funny

    Feele-a shereeng seete-a Zee Purete-a Bey, vheech ves clused doon fullooeeng Vednesdey's reeed by zee Svedeesh puleece-a, oopened egeeen oon Setoordey murneeng under a deefffferent neme-a: Zee Puleece-a Bey.

    Zee seete's perffurmunce-a ves steell petchy et loonchteeme-a oon Setoordey, despeete-a beeeng roon frum noo serfers in Hullund effter ell zee Svedeesh iqooeepment ves cunffeesceted. Bork! Bork!

    Zee reeed, vheech ves cerreeed oooot et husteeng cumpuneees in Stuckhulm, Fästmunlund und Fästra Götelund tergeted oone-a ooff zee vurld's lergest seetes fur shereeng mooseec, gemes und cumpooter prugremmes.

    It ves prumpted by a cumpleeent tu puleece-a frum Unteepuretbyrån, vheech represents zee Svedeesh feelm und mooseec indoostreees' cupyreeght interests. Bork! Bork! Bork!

    Un infesteegeshun egeeenst Zee Purete-a Bey hes beee oongueeng fur munths. "Ve-a beleeefe-a thet ve-a veell be-a fuoond nut gooeelty," seeed Fredreek Neeej, oone-a ooff thuse-a roonneeng Zee Purete-a Bey, tu Ixpressee. "Ve-a ere-a gueeng tu cunteenooe-a unteel zee ferdeect cumes. A-yup!"

    1. Re:The Swedish Chef Reports: by Splab · · Score: 1

      God you deserve a +5 funny for that

    2. Re:The Swedish Chef Reports: by Soulfarmer · · Score: 1, Flamebait

      How come every time someone is mimicking swedish in here, it always sounds dutch... And yes I know The Swedish Cook. I just wish the cook had sounded more swedish than dutch, or then they should've made him The Dutch Cook.

      Me being Finnish, the similarity between dutch and swedish is not enough for me to try laughing at this fake swedish.

      I know it might be funny for the land of the free spirit and free speech. ;)

      --
      -Is the meaning of life vanity, or is vanity the meaning of life?
    3. Re:The Swedish Chef Reports: by ericdano · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      What is the difference? I mean, the Dutch actually have talent. The Swedes? We are still waiting for them to do something, other than have nude beaches.

      --
      It's either on the beat or off the beat, it's that easy.
      I moderate therefore I rule!
      --
    4. Re:The Swedish Chef Reports: by suv4x4 · · Score: 1

      We are still waiting for them to do something, other than have nude beaches.

      When you stop waiting you can take part in "doing something" too.

    5. Re:The Swedish Chef Reports: by ettlz · · Score: 1
      The Swedes? We are still waiting for them to do something, other than have nude beaches.
      Oh. So ABBA doesn't count then?
    6. Re:The Swedish Chef Reports: by Soulfarmer · · Score: 1

      If you didn't realize by now, I meant the differences between the language, dutch and swedish, not the people, Dutch and Swedish. The LANGUAGE difference is that mildly annoys me here. More clearly, the swedish cook does not sound like swedish people, he sounds like Dutch.

      --
      -Is the meaning of life vanity, or is vanity the meaning of life?
    7. Re:The Swedish Chef Reports: by Ullteppe · · Score: 1
      Let's see, IKEA, Abba, H&M, won the World championships in Ice-Hockey this year. Pretty good for a nation of 7 million people or so.

      What has the good ol' US done lately, let's see: Fake elections, make the "land of the free" into one of the more facist states in the western world, invade a third-world country but not manage to control it. Pretty impressive for a country of 300 million people or so.

      And no, I'm not swedish.

    8. Re:The Swedish Chef Reports: by Soulfarmer · · Score: 1

      Not to mention Olympic Ice-Hockey Gold too, which was bitter victory since I am Finnish. :)

      And yeah, the list was nicely put. I wonder why my initial post about the cook got flamebaited :) If the aim of the imitation of the cook was to be funny, since when has stating the facts about something that's supposed to be funny been flamebait. And, I would have much more posts modded as flamebait if I was in that business at all. AND, I know it is futile and naive to defend against unwanted modding.

      --
      -Is the meaning of life vanity, or is vanity the meaning of life?
    9. Re:The Swedish Chef Reports: by kimvette · · Score: 1

      Please don't lump all of us in with our corrupt bastard politicians.

      Thanks. :)

      --
      The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
    10. Re:The Swedish Chef Reports: by TeatimeofSoul · · Score: 1

      Why does the swedish chef keep mispronouncing swedish words?

    11. Re:The Swedish Chef Reports: by IamGarageGuy+2 · · Score: 1

      no

      --
      Stay tuned for new sig...
  24. Check out the new logo just updated! by biscon · · Score: 4, Funny

    The changed the old logo adding cannonballs shooting from the pirate ship smashing a hollywood sign. Way to go my proud swedish brothers. I admire your balls! (ehm.. well you get it).

  25. not a victory by plams · · Score: 5, Insightful

    These news may be great for filesharing people worldwide. But from a political point of view the Piracy Party has not won until the the servers are back up on swedish territory.

    1. Re:not a victory by ClamIAm · · Score: 1

      The Pirate Bay != Piratpartiet.

    2. Re:not a victory by colganc · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I don't think people are seeing at as a victory. I believe people are seeing at as a sign of TPB's will to continune on.

  26. Old Man Gustav Adolf by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You kids get off my Torg!

    1. Re:Old Man Gustav Adolf by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think they're safe, he's been dead for a few hundred years.

  27. Yo Ho Ho And a Bottle of Rum by TFBundy · · Score: 1

    First time in years I got off my butt and actually donated money towards something...

  28. Becoming a huge scandal in Sweden... by D4C5CE · · Score: 3, Insightful
    this is beginning to become a huge scandal in Sweden with coverage on TV and all newspapers 4 days in a row
    And deservedly so, if the seizure is indeed comparable to trying to fight crime by bulldozing an entire law-abiding, tax-paying business district on the vague rumor that someone might probably have bought a fake brand T-shirt once from a street vendor somewhere in there.

    And no matter what statistics anyone may have come up with (or forged), Bittorrent is just a highly efficient means of distributing perfectly legal stuff such as Linux releases, scientific lectures and speeches, or free renders. Much like a knife is a proven instrument for cutting food, rather than reason for suspecting an intent to kill someone.

    BTW if the laws had teeth against some real ills of the information age, and if the authorities were similarly responsive, though hopefully in a more targetted way, against botnet operators perpetrating DDoS and spam, we wouldn't need to have discussions like these for more than a decade already...

  29. ...and... by rathehun · · Score: 1, Funny

    I love their new logo.

  30. Server logs? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The torrent files that the Pirate Bay hosts are, it appears, legal in Sweden. However, the copyright infringement being perfomed by the individuals who download those torrent files and use them to make unauthorised copies of other people's work is certainly not legal in Sweden.

    So, what's the likelihood that any records they may have kept of who's been committing copyright infringement are now in the hands of the Swedish police, the Antipyratbyran, and indeed the MPAA?

    Pretty high, I'd say. Expect more raids soon... but this time, targetting the people who are committing the actual crimes, rather than the people who are exploiting legal loopholes to facilitate them.

    1. Re:Server logs? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      Listen to the interview. According to one of their admins, they don't keep logs. He specifically mentions that they aren't stupid like that.

    2. Re:Server logs? by Respawner · · Score: 1

      Even if they did, one could argue they would have seized the logs illegaly

    3. Re:Server logs? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Setting aside the fact that they admittedly do not keep logs, what will you be arrested for? Downloading torrent files is perfectly legal. Whether or not you use that file to download copyrighted material is something they will have to prove in court.

    4. Re:Server logs? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I doesn't matter, in Sweden evidence is evidence, no matter how you got it.

    5. Re:Server logs? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sweden isn't some random banana republic. There are laws about privacy, information misuse and whatnot.

    6. Re:Server logs? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      can anyone inform us as to the status of evidence obtained by illegal search in Sweden?

  31. I suspect that's only a matter of time... by Svartalf · · Score: 1

    As long as their laws are worded the way they are, the Police is in Trouble as is the Minister of Justice who ordered the raid. The only reason why they fired up the Bay where they did was to get it back up before the brouhaha was settled.

    --
    I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
  32. MOD PARENT UP by Mathiasdm · · Score: 1

    Donating via SMS? Perfect!

    *donates*

    --
    Join the anonymous, help develop the network: http://www.i2p2.de
  33. safety by Turn-X+Alphonse · · Score: 3, Interesting

    But do we feel safe that we used pirate bay? It's not insane to think that the police will follow up IPs of DLing torrents and use this as "reasonable" evidence to investigate further in other countries (USA for example), then take this as far as to taking down trackers or even tracking down single IPs and sueing/arresting people.

    --
    I like muppets.
    1. Re:safety by Ex+Machina · · Score: 3, Insightful

      They've always been able to do this by connecting to a running torrent and seeing the peer names.

    2. Re:safety by Fizzl · · Score: 2, Informative

      I'm not expert on Swedish law, but if it's anything like Finnish I'd say there's no need to worry.
      They are most likely investigating charges against the three detained persons. Thus, they are supposed to find evidence related to the charges against these people. If they find anything else, it is not a reason to push copyright infringment charges against anytone else. I don't think they even could do it with coincidental discovery related to other case.
      See, copyright infringiment atleast here in Finland is not a felony, but a "Asianomistajarikos" (something in which the plaintiff must make a specific accusation and an officially request an investigation against some entity).

      Thus, to get tracker statistics from piratebay, the plaintiff should request an investigation, investigators should have suspicion that TPB is holding relevant records against the offender, ask for subpoena and then get the records from TPB. I don't think they could get a warrant to confiscate the servers for such purpose anyway. Unless TPB was to refuse to surrender the records.

      PS. IANAL, but interested in the law, especially "Pakkotoimilaki". (Law which mandates processes for arresting, house/person searches, fingerprinting, DNA filing, confiscation and so on.)

    3. Re:safety by vertinox · · Score: 1

      But do we feel safe that we used pirate bay?

      Do you feel safe when you smoke pot? Or speed in your care? Or fib on your taxes?

      The truth of the matter is that so many people break the law that it isn't economical or possible to arrest them all even with clear cut evidence. However, they still catch the unlucky few to make examples.

      So the question is... Do you feel lucky? Well do you?

      --
      "I am the king of the Romans, and am superior to rules of grammar!"
      -Sigismund, Holy Roman Emperor (1368-1437)
    4. Re:safety by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I wouldn't be susprised if they have months and months worth of IP address/file information on their servers, but given the nature of the web site, how much logging do you thinkk TPB actually does? If I were them, I'd maintain the absolute minimum amount of logging (possibly none) and run an https server rather than http. That way, the ISP could record the IP address but not the requested URLs of people contacting the server - there would be no way to connect a given IP address with a specific file. Or, is more logging inherently necessary in order to maintain Bittorrent?

    5. Re:safety by Tweekster · · Score: 1

      First of all, people are not arrested for this, so stop with that idiocy right now.

      Second of all, there are no logs

      Third, notice how no one has been sued in the USA for downloading...only uploading.

      --
      The phrase "more better" is acceptable English. suck it grammar Nazis
    6. Re:safety by TheQuantumShift · · Score: 1

      I don't see the Swedish Police knocking down my door anytime soon, but I can see an "Information Exchange" between them and the **AA coming...

      --

      Shift happens. Fire it up.
    7. Re:safety by elpapacito · · Score: 1

      t's not insane to think that the police will follow up IPs of DLing torrents and use this as "reasonable" evidence to investigate further in other countries

      Certainly they could and they already did to an extent. Except it's an expensive strategy that is also giving a lot of bad publicity. Consider that they wouldn't ordinarily mount a scare-campaign for a few thousand copies..they don't care, the profit is already enormous.

      Yet they can't find a way to justify a 10000% markup on a copy, expecially these days one customer can download from the net at a fraction of the fraction of the cost and in perfectly legal ways ! Yet that is not fine enough, because they still fear people will copy , expecially they fear youngster as they communicate and socialize more easily then adults (how depressing !) and adapt more quickly.

      Consider that the idea of copyright isn't a vile, repulsive idea. It does make commercial sense and even practical sense. Yet the implementation of copyright is completely repulsive, vile, criminal !

      a) how is it possible that copyright extends AFTER the life of the author(s) ??

      b) how is possible that a law conceived to REDUCE the cost of single copy makes the single copy offer 100000% markup or more ? It means its being abused by the usual rentiers do-nothing-you-takecost-Itakeprofit white collar criminals !

      c) how is it possible artist receive only an handful of the revenus ? What's the incentive for an artist/author to produce if the greater portion of money is pocketed by people who CLAIM they are absoring risk, yet many times aren't ?

    8. Re:safety by sxtxixtxcxh · · Score: 0

      not disagreeing with you on any of that, but, if i recall correctly, if you're running bittorrent, you're doing both downloading AND uploading.

      /me shrugs

      --
      for a minute there, i lost myself...
    9. Re:safety by Buran · · Score: 1

      how is it possible artist receive only an handful of the revenus

      Because they were stupid enough to sign a one-sided contract. If you are too lazy to do the work on your own or find someone who will give you a better deal, it's no one's fault but yours.

    10. Re:safety by elpapacito · · Score: 1

      Yes the cause of one person problem are often caused by that person, but are you at fault of your ignorance ? Ignorance isn't a fault in the sense that "it is your fault" that you are ignorant..one is born ignorant, it's an human condition.

      Some like to say that if you are ignorant it is your own problem because you were too lazy not to study enough to reduce ignorance ! Except that no matter how much you study, no matter how much you know or work a lifetime isn't enough to know what you need to know , except that when one people exploits your ignorance to exploit you AND then blame you for being ignorant is like having a thief blame you because you allowed the thief to rob you !

    11. Re:safety by Buran · · Score: 1

      In the case of legal contracts, though, it's constantly advised that you be sure of what you're doing before you sign. I can't count how many times I've seen advice go by to read all of a contract before you sign it, and yet when I purchased a car, there was general surprise in the room that I actually read through the pages before signing the contract for the financing. So even though a lot of people don't pay attention, that doesn't excuse them from the consequences of ignoring both common sense and very widely-given advice.

      So yes, in the case of a contract, it IS their fault and they can't say they should have been told what they were signing. They had every chance to read the papers and they didn't, and now they are complaining. It's like a small child who whines when he can't stay up as late as his parents do.

  34. Now I'm a little disappointed by GroeFaZ · · Score: 2, Funny

    I was fully expecting anti-terror units in all black combat suits, with shotguns pointing, flashbangs going off and stuff. But nooo. Also no ninjas cutting peoples' heads off, RoboCops or a horde of battle monkeys. All very boring scenery.

    By the way, PLEASE make a /. frontpage story as soon as the Pirate Bay has a torrent of the raid video online.

    --
    The grass is always greener on the other side of the light cone.
    1. Re:Now I'm a little disappointed by scredda · · Score: 1
  35. i wasn't talking about by circletimessquare · · Score: 2, Interesting

    the clumsiness with which the swedish police went about gutting an entire isp when they only wanted one server

    nor was i talking about the corporate interest-coddling legal procedures of the usa where one powerful private complaint might lead to a shut down

    i have no problem with thinking the the dutch way of going about shutting down a server might superior to both models

    what i am getting at is the weakness that you only need to shut down one server AT ALL, no matter how difficult or easy that is to do

    i am saying that all these trigger happy tactics do is breed a headless system where there is no single point of failure

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    1. Re:i wasn't talking about by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Please learn to capitalize letters so your posts don't read like an emo myspace blog.

      And Mr. Period is your friend, too.

    2. Re:i wasn't talking about by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      :: And Mr. Period is your friend, too.

      Tell that to my girlfriend.

    3. Re:i wasn't talking about by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think the "Spaink & XS4ALL vs Scientology" would be a good example on how this case would probably go.

  36. In other news by Very.Zen · · Score: 1

    In other news! "Hackers hit Swedish police site Logo of The Pirate Bay The Pirate Bay site says it plans to be up again shortly Cyber vandals have attacked the website of the Swedish police, forcing it to shut down. Police said the site was taken offline after it was overloaded by net data." http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/5041848.stm what do you think? Perhaps swedish police got slashdotted :D http://www.polisen.se/inter/nodeid=10230&pageversi on=1.htm I think this is the link, it isnt back up yet from its denial of service. If people could keep checking and let us know when it is back online??

    1. Re:In other news by TomasDK · · Score: 1

      If people could keep checking and let us know when it is back online??
      You're asking that here... that site's gonna be up and running REAL soon, really...

    2. Re:In other news by pimpimpim · · Score: 1

      had exactly the same thought, but no mod points unfortunately :)

      --
      molmod.com - computing tips from a molecular modeling
    3. Re:In other news by Very.Zen · · Score: 1

      I think you wre kind of missing my point. But no matter.

  37. NL doesn't care by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    Mininova, Demonoid and a bunch of other huge sites are located in NL and the RIAA/MPAA cabal has been trying for ages to take them down. It just hasn't worked. The Pirate Bay will reopen its servers in Sweden as soon as the equipment is returned post-investigation. Judging from the public outcry against the long arm of the **IAs, it shouldn't be too long before The Pirate Bay has servers in three different countries.

  38. Could someone please explain by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

    How TPB is legal? I don't mean to troll I am asking this seriously. What i don't really understand is this... TPB exists purly to host torrent files of which the majority (I have never seen a legal file there) are for torrent which contain copyrighted material. Now I know the whole Google argument however Google is designed as a "capture all" system whereas TPB isn't. It is only designed for torrents and as there is no monitoring over what is a legal torrent and what isn't the system is very open to abuse.

    I know torrents are also used for legal material (linux distros, free music, software distribution, etc.) however TBP isn't aimed towards this kind of material, at least not from what I can see.

    If TPB had moderation so that illegal torrent where removed it would make sense however they don't. Pretty emuch Everything on their site is an enabler for downloading copyrighted material.

    Now I hate the RIAA/MPAA and their ways however it is a fact that TPB isn't around to give out legal torrents. I don't know if the search was legal or whatnot and I would hate to see this hurt bittorrent as I think it is an incredible system.

    Could someone please explain to me how exactly they are legal. I would really like to know.

    1. Re:Could someone please explain by Mikkeles · · Score: 4, Informative

      A .torrent isn't copyrighted and linking to copyrighted material isn't either.

      --
      Great minds think alike; fools seldom differ.
    2. Re:Could someone please explain by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ok. I understand that but the torrent is an enabler. The only reason one would ever get a torrent file would be to use it to download the material it was created for. Also is a torrent classified as linking to copytighted material or a means of distributing copyrighted material?

    3. Re:Could someone please explain by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Ever heard of contributory infringement?

    4. Re:Could someone please explain by cnettel · · Score: 1

      What is your reasoning behind the .torrent not being copyrighted? You're not allowed to summarize the works of others in any manner in text (although much is allowed), so why should you be allowed to do it in binary? True, this "summary" is basically only useful to make sure you have the correct file, but it is still very directly based on a copyrighted work, with no added value of any kind, it's not like a review of the original work, for example.

    5. Re:Could someone please explain by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yes thats exatly my point. If something exists only to assist in doing something illegal it is, in my opinion, just as illegal as the act of doing it. People who advertise on ways to break the law are shut down so I see no different why a website should be any difference? It isn't about freedom of speech. If a website had detailed instructions on how to get away with making and selling illegal drugs or raping someone I am sure it would be shut down, and rightly so. Freedom of speech, as as Interpret it, is being able to voice ones opinion about the government or another party without the fear of retribution, etc. It doesn't mean you have the right to write any old thing and put it online when its only aim is to assiting in destroying something or someone by enabling them to do an illegal act.

    6. Re:Could someone please explain by imsabbel · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Where do you draw the line?
      The torrent file is just a hash tree.
      So with your argumentation, MD5s would be illegal, too, right? (same thing)
      What about CRC32. Is that not-illegal enough for you?

      Hint: there is a difference between an summary of a work and a hash. That is that the summary is a work in itself thats derived on the original work, while the hash is just a data structure.

      --
      HI O WISE PRINCE. WHT TOOK U SO DAM LONG?
    7. Re:Could someone please explain by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      .torrent files contain NO INFORMATION ABOUT THE FILE ITSELF. They contain information about how to contact the computer[s] that have the files to request them. again: .torrent files CONTAIN NO COPYRIGHTED MATERIAL

    8. Re:Could someone please explain by Jon_A_Mnemonic · · Score: 3, Informative

      A torrent file is basically an "assembly instruction manual" for data file(s). Just as it's not illegal to distribute instructions for building a bomb or a gun, it is also not illegal to distribute instructions on how to create a data file. Actually building (or using) a bomb might or might not be illegal, but merely delivering the instructions on how to build it is definitely not illegal (at least in the U.S., so far). Just so with torrents: hosting the torrent files, distributing them, downloading them, that's all legal. Actually using the torrent file to "build" the data file(s) it represents is what is illegal, if the file(s) being (re)built are copyrighted.

      If you want to start a website that does nothing but provide instructions on how to build bombs, you can do it. Even if every single person who downloads those instructions uses them to build a bomb and tries to blow up a packed church on Sunday.

    9. Re:Could someone please explain by Laglorden · · Score: 1

      A summary of some ones work is not illegal. That would be crazy... "I just saw this movie about a guy who lived in a world that wasn't real and then he woke up as a... battery? Really strange."

      And the next thing you know you're kidnapped, blindfolded and shipped to Guantanamo...

    10. Re:Could someone please explain by cnettel · · Score: 1
      Hashing would not be illegal. The key is redistribution (and, for that matter, intent). Your hint is actually contradicting your point of view, as the very fact that a summary is a work on its own makes it more acceptable, while the hash is just that - a one-way transformation of the original work. There is no new originality, just a massive lossy compression. The amount of data is still large enough to make a collision by accident next to impossible.

      You can just as well say that it's hard to draw the line between mp3 and .torrent. If you downsample far enough and lower the bitrate enough, what's left is a (bad) hashing method.

    11. Re:Could someone please explain by EvilIdler · · Score: 1

      As far as I can tell, Swedish law doesn't have a concept of "contributory infringement".
      It's big in the US, though..

    12. Re:Could someone please explain by cnettel · · Score: 1
      The point is that the automated summary is just that, automated. And there HAS been legal precedence around commercial plagiarism involving summaries -- it's not immediately ok just because you've not copied everything.

      If the manual summary was detailed enough that you could read the original book/see the original movie and notice if any one frame/sentence was missing or had been replaced, it would obviously be rather detailed...

    13. Re:Could someone please explain by ditoa · · Score: 1

      So why not just use MD5? What does a torrent have that makes it better to use than an MD5 hash or a CRC hash?

    14. Re:Could someone please explain by ditoa · · Score: 1

      They contain information about how to contact the computer[s] that have the files to request them. That seems worse to me :-/

    15. Re:Could someone please explain by cnettel · · Score: 1
      It also contains the address back to the tracker, which keeps a current list of nodes carrying the real file. TPB is both an indexer (carrying torrent files) and a tracker (keeping track of the peers that are currently available). BitTorrent uses SHA-1, with one hash value for each "piece", the size of which might quite a lot, but it's often in the range 256k-4M. The peers only exchange complete pieces, checking that the result they receive mathces the SHA-1 specified in the torrent. A normal MD5 (or SHA-1) for the complete file would mean that you couldn't do any checking until the complete file had been received, which wouldn't fit too well with the intent.

      In addition, of course, it's possible to generate MD5 collisions these days. Although it's still not possible to generate data with a specific hash, you can generate two sets of data with the same hash easily.

    16. Re:Could someone please explain by cnettel · · Score: 1

      Of course they contain info on the file. A hash for each piece. On the other hand, they contain NO information on who has the file, only a reference back to the tracker, which provides that information on demand over HTTP. Any torrent on TPB only contains the TPB web server address, and hashes based on the original file(s).

    17. Re:Could someone please explain by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sounds like a derivative work to me.

    18. Re:Could someone please explain by Jugalator · · Score: 1

      Actually, to be completely correct, isn't a .torrent file copyrighted by the person creating it? :-)

      I think copyright defense is automatic for created material.

      --
      Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
    19. Re:Could someone please explain by Jugalator · · Score: 1

      Oh, and one more thing. There's not even a link to the infringing material in the torrents either (and hence on TPB). Just a hash. That should realistically tie torrent files to the actual material, not like direct links, but more like a description a person gives for a piece of software.

      --
      Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
    20. Re:Could someone please explain by imsabbel · · Score: 1

      Emule/Edonkes ed2k links are that.
      Just a filename, a filesize, and a MD5 hash.

      The torrent stores also hashes for every block of the file (32k-4MB), as to detect and correct errors.

      --
      HI O WISE PRINCE. WHT TOOK U SO DAM LONG?
    21. Re:Could someone please explain by Kjella · · Score: 1

      Well, that's the "pro-legality" arguments. Now, let me play the devil's advocate.

      Let me first reduce the scope to files where there's no valid distribution license, i.e. where the transfer of the actual file would be a direct copyright infringement. You may of course try to invoke the "I didn't know" defense, but given the overwhelming majority of such files and the publicity it has recieved for doing so, nevermind the colorful responses to C&D letters, that is never going to fly. The Pirate Bay have been distributing torrents of those files with impunity.

      First of all, a torrent file does not contain "generic" information like building a bomb (which is an embodiment of chemistry and physics) or a gun (ballistics), none of which are outright banned anyway. A torrent file contains explicity assembly instruction for the file concerned, and is useless for any other purpose than assembling or verifying that specific file. Imagine CSS wasn't so horribly broken, instead you had people posting decryption keys to specific files like: "This is the decryption key for the X-Men 3 DVD". That would obviously be illegal, and so would probably torrent files be if it was that simple.

      A better comparison would be to a par2 file, a parity information file which also contain a hash of the blocks making up that file. It is a completely legitimate tool for transferring data over unreliable connections. Pretty much the only difference between a torrent and a par2 file is that it also contains the link to a tracker. A tracker serves no other purpose than to facilitate a trading ground for that file (though the actual trading occurs between the peers connected to the tracker, not over the tracker itself).

      Why is that relevant? Well, because it changes the whole concept from "This is how you build a gun" to "This is how and where you kill people for maximum terror effect". It is explicit instructions on doing something illegal and where to do it. If courts rule that torrents have no substantial use except to conduct copyright infringment, and that to distribute files is to contribute to that, then I would say you're pretty screwed at least in the US.

      Basicly, the whole thing smells to me like allofmp3 in Russia - basicly, yes we fully know what we're doing but thanks to a technicality you can't actually prosecute us for anything. Had this been a criminal case, they would probably be prosecuted for "aiding and abetting/accessory" to criminal copyright infringement. Their whole defense seems to be "There's no secondary liability for copyright infringement in Swedish law, suckers! You can't touch us, na-na-nanana"

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    22. Re:Could someone please explain by Overzeetop · · Score: 1

      Okay, I'll bite.

      Assuming that the site in question is not in the US, or subject to US laws, why would is this true:

      posting decryption keys to specific files like: "This is the decryption key for the X-Men 3 DVD". That would obviously be illegal,

      It's not illegal everywhere to post a decryption key. It's perfectly legal, in the US, for me to use such a decryption key on a disc which I own (actually, I've ripped about 100 of the 300 discs I own, using a program to get the encryption key). If this were a much stronger encryption that I couldn't break myself, I could still procure a key and use it legally.

      The "technicalities" you mention are part of the law, and there are actually times when the technicalities are the major part of the law (called "loopholes") and are placed intentionally for the benefit of those who pay to have the laws created. The problem with laws is that you can't put intent into black and white. Otherwise, there would be no need for specifics in Copyright law. It could simply be stated that copyright is for the advancement of the arts and sciences - those things which detract from the creation of art and science are illegal, and all other activities which do not are legal. That's not sufficient, though, so we create terms of copyright, and allowable uses which spell out what is and isn't lawful, and the rest is up for interpretation.

      Their whole defense seems to be "There's no secondary liability for copyright infringement in Swedish law, suckers! You can't touch us, na-na-nanana"

      Well, I suppose you could get a group of 18 year olds and take them over to England and have them order up a drink at the local pub, then make a video of them holding their drinks, saying "The drinking age is only 18 in England, suckers! You can't touch us, na-na-nanana". Childish, to be sure, but fully legal nonetheless.

      --
      Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
    23. Re:Could someone please explain by ditoa · · Score: 1

      Ok so cut your file up into small chunks and SHA-1 each 256K-4M chunk. The only real difference between an MD5 (SHA-1) hash and a torrent file is that the torrent file stores information on the server (Tracker) you can use to get a copy of the file(s) chunks that have been hashed in the torrent file yes?

    24. Re:Could someone please explain by ditoa · · Score: 1

      If it is done on demand over HTTP then isnt TPB server assisting in copyright infringment when it passes on that information on demand? Say the whole argument over torrent files has been resolved and torrent files are perfectly ok no matter what they are used for, isn't it illegal when TPB starts giving you info on who has each chunk of the file?

    25. Re:Could someone please explain by ditoa · · Score: 1

      Yes but could you get a bunch of 18 year olds, take them to England, buy a load of alcohol and take it back to America and drink it there?

    26. Re:Could someone please explain by Overzeetop · · Score: 1

      Of course not, but if they did, I don't think that the US authorities could have the pub raided and their kegs confiscated.

      --
      Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
    27. Re:Could someone please explain by ditoa · · Score: 1

      I was not talking about pubs, I was talking about consuming the alcohol on your own property, which, I assume, is still illegal in the US?

    28. Re:Could someone please explain by TheSpoom · · Score: 1

      You missed the analogy there; Grandparent was suggesting that the pub was analogous to the tracker in Sweden, and US pressure was what shut it down. No, it's not legal to download infringing works in the US, however, that would be a penalty that the end user downloading the file would face. It shouldn't be one for which the tracker, operating a system that is entirely legal in their country of origin, should have to pay.

      --
      It's better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it.
      - E. Debs
    29. Re:Could someone please explain by Random832 · · Score: 1

      Sure. Which the torrent tracker may be guilty of.

      Fortunately, the law doesn't (AFAIK/IANAL) recognize double-indirect contributory infringement.

      --
      We've secretly replaced Slashdot with new Folgers Crystals - let's see if it notices.
    30. Re:Could someone please explain by Pofy · · Score: 1

      >And there HAS been legal precedence around
      >commercial plagiarism involving summaries

      Please link to the appropriate Swedish High court ruling (which is the one typically seting precendence in Sweden) you refer to.

  39. The average Joe may care more in future... by Anonymous+Brave+Guy · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Leaving aside the legality of the police actions, which sound dubious under Swedish law from everything I've read...

    I think a lot of people here aren't looking at the bigger picture. Whether you like it or not, the vast majority of the international community in the western world does agree on some basic legal principles:

    • Works are protected by copyright.
    • Copyright infringement is illegal.
    • Mass distribution without permission of copyrighted works is infringing.
    • Helping someone to break a law is in itself illegal.

    Now, Sweden may choose to disagree, and within its own borders, that's its prerogative. The problem is that in this case, the damage is not contained within its own borders. By dissenting from the general concensus, Sweden is providing a safe haven that allows people to break the law in other countries with apparently impunity.

    You can't really expect the rest of the world to stand by and let this happen. If Sweden doesn't play ball, at least to some reasonable extent, then it's likely to face serious consequences on the international stage. Do you really want to see Sweden facing formal reprimands and trade sanctions in five years?

    --
    If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
    1. Re:The average Joe may care more in future... by tomhudson · · Score: 5, Informative

      Helping someone to break a law is in itself illegal.

      Contributory infringement has to be direct, not indirect. Pointing someone to a computer that has a chunk of a file is indirect. Giving them that chunk is direct.

      The difference is important - otherwise, your electical company, your landlord if you rent/your bank if you have a mortgage, the company that made your computer, the chair you sit your ass in to type, and the boss who pays your salary so yo can afford all the shiny toys, would all be guilty of contributing to infringement, since without them you wouldn't be able to infringe the copyright. Oh, and the government as well, since they regulate the telecom industry and provide the environment that allows you to do all these things.

    2. Re:The average Joe may care more in future... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Do you really think Sweden will be facing sanctions over file-sharing when the UN is pussy-footing around with Iran for trying to build nuclear weapons?

    3. Re:The average Joe may care more in future... by Yartrebo · · Score: 1

      The damage is contained within its own borders. Since when has loss of access to economic rents been 'damage?' I consider that a solution, not a problem.

    4. Re:The average Joe may care more in future... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Huh, who gives a shit!

      1) No one is talking about copyrighted work on this servers! Basically it does nothing more than google or any webpage that by accident (or not) links to unlawful sites.

      2) So, if the internet is indeed international and Sweden has to care what other countries law says, does that mean, that the US has to follow the swedish law too. That would be entertaining indeed... :-)

    5. Re:The average Joe may care more in future... by drsmithy · · Score: 4, Interesting
      Copyright infringement is illegal.

      The devil is in the details. In this case, "most of the western world" would probably disagree quite strongly on a) what constitutes infringement, b) how long works should be protected for and c) what the punishments should be.

      For example, I doubt you'd find many people who think downloading a song that gets played ten times a day on free to air radio should be considered infringement. Similarly, you will probably not find a lot of sympathy for media companies claiming to be "suffering" from copyright infringement in the face of ever increasing profits and ever decreasing product quality.

    6. Re:The average Joe may care more in future... by persnowfall.se · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Under Swedish law, what matters is your intentions in the act that constitutes a crime. Google or my electrical company has no specific intention in helping me breake the law. In the case of The pirate bay on the other hand you would IMHO have trouble arguing that they has no intention in helping people violate copyright laws. Exibit A, there logo, Exibit B, their name, Exib... eh, you get the picture.

    7. Re:The average Joe may care more in future... by cpt+kangarooski · · Score: 3, Informative

      I'm sorry, but pretty much everything in your post is wrong.

      Contributory infringement has to be direct, not indirect.

      No, contributory infringement is inherently indirect infringement, also known as secondary liability. Maybe you're getting confused by the fact that there must be an underlying direct infringement which is contributed to.

      Napster, for example, was found liable for contributory infringement because they were aware of infringements on their system (having been expressly told about them by copyright holders) but nevertheless continued to materially assist the users who were directly infringers. All Napster did was to provide a technology and and index of links, remember.

      They're not alone. It's actually not that uncommon to see linking result in liability.

      Pointing someone to a computer that has a chunk of a file is indirect. Giving them that chunk is direct.

      Also your example fails, because giving someone a file will not be contributory infringement, it will be direct infringement, in the form of distribution.

      The difference is important - otherwise, your electical company, your landlord if you rent/your bank if you have a mortgage, the company that made your computer, the chair you sit your ass in to type, and the boss who pays your salary so yo can afford all the shiny toys, would all be guilty of contributing to infringement, since without them you wouldn't be able to infringe the copyright. Oh, and the government as well, since they regulate the telecom industry and provide the environment that allows you to do all these things.

      No, for two reasons. First, the law differentiates between factual causes and proximate causes. For example, let's imagine that A negligently runs a red light and hits B. B can sue A, but he can't sue A's mother. A's mother is certainly in the chain of factual causation: if she hadn't had A, A wouldn't have hit B. But she is too far removed from the car crash for liability to stand.

      Second, one of the elements of contributory infringement is knowledge of the infringement at the time of the contribution. It is incredibly unlikely that any of those entities will have the slightest idea what you're doing at the time when you download something unlawfully. Therefore they're off the hook.

      --
      -- This and all my posts are in the public domain. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer, and this is not legal advice.
    8. Re:The average Joe may care more in future... by SilentChris · · Score: 1

      Not necessarily.

      I made this point in another post: Pirate Bay is the dark alley. It may not be a "direct" route to illegality, but it's certainly "more direct" than blaming people like the electric company. The electric company services people, businesses, charity -- probably 99% of which is legal. The Pirate Bay points you directly to the illegal stuff. Big difference.

      In my city, the dark alleys are routinely visited by cops, and the crime rate is way down. Some dark alleys are permanently walled up or turned into apartment buildings, businesses, etc (you know, something useful). The Pirate Bay will be the same thing.

    9. Re:The average Joe may care more in future... by Surt · · Score: 1

      the vast majority of the international community in the western world does agree on some basic legal principles:

      I think you're thinking of some small cartels, not the vast majority of the international community in the western world.

      That those cartels have had the financial resources to pass laws controlling the actions of the vast majority is just a reflection of the poor design of our western governmental systems.

      --
      "Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking
    10. Re:The average Joe may care more in future... by kimvette · · Score: 1

      Why not? Protecting the Mickey Mouse law is a high priority - much higher than, oh, say, actually capturing Osama Bin Laden, developing clean power, building modernized oil refineries, or resolving Middle East problems. Where the hell are your priorities, anyway? ;)

      --
      The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
    11. Re:The average Joe may care more in future... by linuxhansl · · Score: 1
      • Copyright infringement is illegal.
      • ...
      • Helping someone to break a law is in itself illegal.

      "Illegal" is what violates the law. It's a definition rather than something that's natural or given. Hence it does not have to be accepted unexamined. It's not necessarily right, just because it is a law.

      These things are legal in Sweden. You don't like it? Build a big firewall around the US to keep "illegal" content/information out.
      I sure would like to see your reaction if some US TV station is raided because some broadcasted content is viewable in - say - Iran and deemed illegal there.

      How about "laws" like: "Jews have to wear Star of David", "Raped women have to marry their rapist", "Speaking up against the government is forbidden", etc, etc? These were/are laws in some countries... Does that mean one has to follow them? Hell no.

      dissenting from the general concensus

      Whose consensus? Yours? Last I heard most folks in this country don't approve of long jail terms (sometimes longer than for rape) for copyright infringement.

    12. Re:The average Joe may care more in future... by jez9999 · · Score: 1

      Do you really want to see Sweden facing formal reprimands and trade sanctions in five years?

      No, we'd like to see the rest of the world get a clue and enact reasonable copyright laws, and I can't see a better way to do it than a major Western country starting the resistance to the current ones.

    13. Re:The average Joe may care more in future... by shark72 · · Score: 1

      "For example, I doubt you'd find many people who think downloading a song that gets played ten times a day on free to air radio should be considered infringement."

      I'd give the general public more credit than that. I think a significant amount of the population understands that if an action is legally infringing, it's infringing regardless of how often it's played on the radio. The question is one of what external factors make infringement justifiable. "I hear it a lot on the radio" is a common rationale, as is "the record company makes enough money anyway." The problem with this approach is that it can end up biting one in the ass. I certainly wouldn't want somebody infringing on my rights based on their opinion of whether I make too much money or if the infringement will otherwise hurt me. And the trouble is that no matter how much money you have, there's always going to be somebody out there who thinks you make more than you should.

      "Similarly, you will probably not find a lot of sympathy for media companies claiming to be "suffering" from copyright infringement in the face of ever increasing profits and ever decreasing product quality."

      Really? Profits in the entertainment industry are going up? That's not what analysts think. There've been massive layoffs and consolidations in the record industry, for example, and CD prices are in freefall. Slashdotters blame product quality; the record labels blame piracy. I think the truth is somewhere in between, but "ever increasing profits" is a tough one. Do you have any citations to back that up?

      However, I do perfectly understand your lament that product quality is going down. It seems like everybody of every generation says this. I subscribe to the believe that 90% of everything in any given year is utter crap, but we tend to remember the good stuff and forget the awful stuff. Thus, the perception that quality is going down. This is known as "nostalgia."

      --
      Sitting in my day care, the art is decopainted.
    14. Re:The average Joe may care more in future... by djmurdoch · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Really? Profits in the entertainment industry are going up? That's not what analysts think.

      I think this varies from country to country. In the USA, where the RIAA attacks its customers with lawsuits, profits may not be going up. But in Canada, where we have a private copying right (i.e. it is legal for me to copy music for my own use), profits are going up. Here's Michael Geist talking about a study commissioned by the federal government:

      In recent years, however, the Canadian copyright industries have outperformed the U.S. with respect to growth rates and contribution to national employment.
      [...]
      Warning that "these findings should be treated with caution", the study reports that the Canadian sound recording industry grew steadily from 1999 to 2004, with the GDP contribution jumping from $243 million to $387 million.


      The authors of the report believed the propaganda from the CRIA, so they didn't trust the objective data that they collected.

    15. Re:The average Joe may care more in future... by Anonymous+Brave+Guy · · Score: 1

      There are at least two key differences. One is conjecture (and conjecture that's been made before and found completely incorrect at that) while the other is an obvious and ongoing concern. One is potentially a cause of future damage while the other is causing damage right now.

      --
      If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
    16. Re:The average Joe may care more in future... by tomhudson · · Score: 1

      The Pirae Bay's logo and name are immaterial ... if they called themselves The Police, that wouldn't have any probative value as to their intent.

      According to your logic, the Pittsburgh Pirates should all be thrown in jail, since their name would be, in your world, prima facae evidence of their evil intentions ...

      Ditto the Steelers ...

      And Shakespeare would be barred from airplanes because his name has connotations of vioence - "shake + spear"

      You can't prove intent from a name, only from actions, and they've made it quite clear that they do not have any copyrighted material on their servers. As for the intent, its the downloaders who have the intent - the servers have non, they're machines. Its the same if they were hosting porn. That someone downloads it then goes on a sex+drug-crazed orgy is not their responsibility. Ditto for anyone buying a violent video game and then shooting people.

    17. Re:The average Joe may care more in future... by Anonymous+Brave+Guy · · Score: 1
      I think you're thinking of some small cartels, not the vast majority of the international community in the western world.

      The relevant laws are guided by WIPO treaties, to which those countries I mentioned are all signatories, and the relevant agreements here have been in place and implemented as laws since a long time before the whole **AA/P2P thing kicked off.

      --
      If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
    18. Re:The average Joe may care more in future... by tomhudson · · Score: 1
      You actually confirmed my point ...

      I said:

      Pointing someone to a computer that has a chunk of a file is indirect. Giving them that chunk is direct.

      ... and you replied ...

      Also your example fails, because giving someone a file will not be contributory infringement, it will be direct infringement, in the form of distribution.

      The servers at TPB do NOT give anyone a chunk of the file. They are NOT distributing. Perhaps you don't understand how torrents work - they contain NO copyright material; they're an index, like google or yahoo. Unlike either google or yahoo, though, they don't even contain one byte of material from the file in question. So there is no distribution from TPB servers.

      Also, you said:

      Second, one of the elements of contributory infringement is knowledge of the infringement at the time of the contribution. It is incredibly unlikely that any of those entities will have the slightest idea what you're doing at the time when you download something unlawfully. Therefore they're off the hook.

      I agree with you there; since the process is entirely automated, there is no knowledge, same as a telephone network carrying a conversation where two people are plotting a conspiracy.

      It will certainly be an interesting case, and it shows how 18th century copyright law can't cope with 21st century technology. Even the mainstream media now is saying that the **AAs went too far, have shown that their tactics are ultimately self-defeating, and they're going to have to find some way to learn to co-exist with the new reality.

    19. Re:The average Joe may care more in future... by Surt · · Score: 1

      As I said, small cartels. WIPO, 'elected' governments, etc.

      --
      "Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking
    20. Re:The average Joe may care more in future... by shark72 · · Score: 1

      Interesting! In a country which is less restrictive on copyrights (ie. the legality of making private copies), the music industry appears to be doing fine. Perhaps the USA could learn from this.

      Just to pick one nit... increased sales != increased profits. I read a while back that the Canadian music industry's net profit for 2004 was something like 10%. That's pretty low, as industries go, but that may still have been an improvement from previous years.

      --
      Sitting in my day care, the art is decopainted.
    21. Re:The average Joe may care more in future... by Anonymous+Brave+Guy · · Score: 1

      Sorry, but that's the best way of representing the will of the people we've got. Moreover, at the last count, a lot more people didn't rip content illegally than did, despite the illusions around these parts to the contrary. If I were wrong about this and you were right, then this issue would at least register at election time, yet as far as I'm aware, it hasn't even had a passing mention in any political manfiesto, at least in my country. I'm sorry if that reality is upsetting to you, but that's simply the way things are.

      --
      If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
    22. Re:The average Joe may care more in future... by cpt+kangarooski · · Score: 1

      You actually confirmed my point ...

      No, because you had conflated direct infringement and contributory infringement. In fact, contributory infringement is a type of indirect infringement.

      The servers at TPB do NOT give anyone a chunk of the file. They are NOT distributing.

      I know, and I know how torrents work. I agree that they are not directly infringing. But they are likely contributory infringers, and depending on what their site is like, they might be vicarious infringers. Whether they're also inducing infringement is difficult to say, both because I'm not aware of precisely what they've been doing, and because there's so little caselaw; things are still developing there.

      I agree with you there; since the process is entirely automated, there is no knowledge, same as a telephone network carrying a conversation where two people are plotting a conspiracy.

      However, when TPB gets a letter from a copyright holder, which has been known to happen, they're put on notice and have knowlege. This is precisely how things went down with Napster, you'll recall. And while Grokster took care to avoid being a contributory and vicarious infringer, they ended up being liable for inducement.

      Of course, with these last couple of paragraphs, we've moved from a general discussion to a discussion of TPB specifically, and US law would not really apply to them.

      --
      -- This and all my posts are in the public domain. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer, and this is not legal advice.
    23. Re:The average Joe may care more in future... by persnowfall.se · · Score: 1

      Your missing the point.

      It is illegal in sweden to assist anyone in breaking the copyright law and that is exactly what they are doing. However they would get away with it for the same reason that google gets away with "assisting" people in breaking the same laws, if there was a lack of intent. This is were the name, logo, and all their statements comes in to the picture. I think you would have a very week case in court, arguing that they didnt deliberatly help people with distributing material that they know is copyrighted.

      Its much harder to get away with bending the rules and finding loopholes in sweden than in the USA. Judges will simply ask them selves if the intention behind the site is (perhaps among other things) to help people violate the copyright laws. TBP can hardly argue that they didnt know anyting about piracy. None will buy that, hence they could be in trouble.

      Their rescue could be the problem of finding a specific violation i.e a file they knew was illegal and still provided a torrent for. Their list of legal threats could give the prosecutors a good start though...

    24. Re:The average Joe may care more in future... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You wrote: "the vast majority of the international community in the western world"

      I am Spanish, and my country is no doubt part of de western world. Here in Spain copying movies, music, etc for private purposes is perfectly lawful (software is excepted). We pay an special tax for it (the money from this tax goes to authors). AFAIK law is similar in most European Union countries.

      Recently, an Spanish judge ruled "not guilty" for a web page similar to TPB.

      In France 2 movie downloaders were found "not guilty" (2 different rulings by different judges).

      Get the big picture: copyright, as any other rigth, has limits.

    25. Re:The average Joe may care more in future... by Anonymous+Brave+Guy · · Score: 1

      Blockquoth the AC:

      I am Spanish, and my country is no doubt part of de western world. Here in Spain copying movies, music, etc for private purposes is perfectly lawful (software is excepted). We pay an special tax for it (the money from this tax goes to authors). AFAIK law is similar in most European Union countries.

      Copying for personal use is legal in many places, but distribution usually is not. Is that different in Spain?

      Get the big picture: copyright, as any other rigth, has limits.

      Of course copyright has limits. But those limits generally do not extend to rendering it useless by permitting arbitrarily wide distribution without any form of compensation.

      You should check your facts about the court cases, BTW. A court in France, for example, did rule that P2P was legal. That was almost immediately overturned by a higher court and by legislative intervention, since it's questionable whether any state that is a signatory to WIPO treaties can actually do that. (Under the main relevant treaty, any exemptions to copyright must meet three criteria. It's just about arguable that the US fair use provisions do meet them, but pretty clear that a blanket, open-ended right to distribute via P2P would not.)

      --
      If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
    26. Re:The average Joe may care more in future... by Surt · · Score: 1

      It's not close to the best system we have, it's just the one we're stuck with. And I don't recall the public outcry over 'illegal' copying that led to the DMCA, somehow it seems like a lot of laws just come out special interests with money over the will of the people ... I'm not sure how that happens exactly, but it seems to be some sort of flaw with the existing system.

      I'm sorry if right being different from reality is upsetting to you, but sometimes that's just the way things are.

      --
      "Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking
    27. Re:The average Joe may care more in future... by cpt+kangarooski · · Score: 1
      The Pirae Bay's logo and name are immaterial ... if they called themselves The Police, that wouldn't have any probative value as to their intent.

      Really? They would be perfectly material here in the US. The following is from the Supreme Court opinion for Grokster.

      [O]ne who distributes a device with the object of promoting its use to infringe copyright, as shown by clear expression or other affirmative steps taken to foster infringement, is liable for the resulting acts of infringement by third parties.

      Here, the summary judgment record is replete with other evidence that Grokster and StreamCast, unlike the manufacturer and distributor in Sony, acted with a purpose to cause copyright violations by use of software suitable for illegal use.

      Three features of this evidence of intent are particularly notable. First, each company showed itself to be aiming to satisfy a known source of demand for copyright infringement, the market comprising former Napster users. StreamCast's internal documents made constant reference to Napster, it initially distributed its Morpheus software through an OpenNap program compatible with Napster, it advertised its OpenNap program to Napster users, and its Morpheus software functions as Napster did except that it could be used to distribute more kinds of files, including copyrighted movies and software programs. Grokster's name is apparently derived from Napster, it too initially offered an OpenNap program, its software's function is likewise comparable to Napster's, and it attempted to divert queries for Napster onto its own Web site. Grokster and StreamCast's efforts to supply services to former Napster users, deprived of a mechanism to copy and distribute what were overwhelmingly infringing files, indicate a principal, if not exclusive, intent on the part of each to bring about infringement.


      Sure, the name might not be probative all on its own, but it is certainly a factor.
      --
      -- This and all my posts are in the public domain. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer, and this is not legal advice.
    28. Re:The average Joe may care more in future... by tomhudson · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Of course, with these last couple of paragraphs, we've moved from a general discussion to a discussion of TPB specifically, and US law would not really apply to them.
      TPB can ONLY be discussed in relation to swedish law, My comments were made in that context. Swedish law so far says that TPB is legal. The politicians blew it, and more importantly, the **AA have now made it quite clear that the real issue is, and always has been, power and moeny - forget respoect for the law, or even fair use.

      So you know something ... I'm not going to be a fence-sitter. I'm going to encourage everyone I know to do as much as they can to damage the interests of the **AAs; If its from them, copy, pirate, do whatever you want. Why? Because they're obsolete, and the sooner we move on, the better for society as a whole.

    29. Re:The average Joe may care more in future... by tomhudson · · Score: 1

      I think you would have a very week case in court

      Only 7 days? Come on, even I could drag this out to more than a month of hearings, spread out over, say, 3 years. Never mind the idsocovery, pre-trial motions, etc., without a lawyer.

    30. Re:The average Joe may care more in future... by tomhudson · · Score: 1

      Really? They would be perfectly material here in the US.

      You missed two points - one of them being that TPB isn't in the US, and neither is most of the rest of the world (including me). The other one being the choice of "The Police" as an example. Think about it.

      Anyway - it no longer matters. The ** AA are now irrelevant. they've been shown to be completely incapable of enforcing their "rights", and that society ahs to move on. the **AAs are going to go the way of the buggy whip manufacturers, and good riddance.

    31. Re:The average Joe may care more in future... by skrolle2 · · Score: 1

      Funnily enough, YOU are missing the even bigger picture.

      People don't care about this crime. There is a vast discrepancy between copyright law and the general opinion about it in the entire western world. The reason copyright law looks the way it does is because of the effort of a very small copyright lobby. Their propositions go unopposed because people don't care. 90 years? Fine, whatever.

      However, law enforcement without unlimited funds means that you have to prioritize. Every police force does this, ours too. Now, the small copyright lobby demands higher prioritization for the crimes they care about, copyright infringement. But law enforcement prioritization is something that people do care about, strongly. And people don't think the police should spend resources on hunting down filesharers and put them in jail. Not here at least, and if you would ask around in the rest of the western world, I think you'd get the same answer, there are far more important crimes to worry about. Copyright infringement is not an important crime in the people's opinion, and it's definitely not something you would impose trade sanctions for.

    32. Re:The average Joe may care more in future... by 91degrees · · Score: 1

      Really, I think the important point is intent. Something that's always a lot harder to prove, but appears to be important in law.

    33. Re:The average Joe may care more in future... by xenobyte · · Score: 1
      Pointing someone to a computer that has a chunk of a file is indirect. Giving them that chunk is direct.

      Also your example fails, because giving someone a file will not be contributory infringement, it will be direct infringement, in the form of distribution.


      No, it's you that fails, fails at actually reading what you're responding to. Or maybe you're clueless as to how BitTorrent works....

      The portal (The Pirate Bay or similar) gives you a webpage featuring links to torrent files. These files does not contain a single bit of copyrighted information, nor do they point to any. They point to someone that claims to a have one or more chunks of what may be copyrighted information (not known until these chunks are assembled). As TPB only point to something that points to something that points to chunks of something that may be copyrighted, there's no way any sane person can call this 'direct'. It is extremely indirect, if anything.

      If you actually manage to cook up some legislation that truly bans BitTorrent portals like TPB, you'll have banned Google and every other search engine out there as well. It is trivial to use Google to fetch exabytes of copyrighted stuff, but so far they've lived in a grey area because it has been held that search engines are not responsible for what they link to, including direct links actually. TPB did not link to anything illegal at all because the torrent files they link to contain nothing copyrighted.

      I, for one, am extremely happy to see The Pirate Bay back online again. Not that I use it much, it's the principle that the highly illegal attempt at shutting them down using cooked-up warrants, methods and overkill usually associated with fascist police states, failed miserably. They're back and their activities were only set back two days.

      I hope that when the legal repercussions of that raid are settled, TPB moves back to Sweden where it will be protected against repeats due to the fallout of this affair. The raid itself was illegal, the minister of justice's involvement in the warrant was highly illegal and the execution of the raid was a massive abuse of power, complete with the covered cameras, 200 servers removed without warrant, and the refusal of the police to comment to the press on the many issues at hand.
      --
      "For every complex problem, there is a solution that is simple, neat, and wrong." -- H.L. Mencken (1880-1956) --
    34. Re:The average Joe may care more in future... by cpt+kangarooski · · Score: 1

      TPB can ONLY be discussed in relation to swedish law, My comments were made in that context.

      I don't think so. Remember, this whole thread has originated from the post where Anonymous Brave Guy said:

      I think a lot of people here aren't looking at the bigger picture. Whether you like it or not, the vast majority of the international community in the western world does agree on some basic legal principles: ...

      Helping someone to break a law is in itself illegal.


      And that's where you responded, saying:

      Contributory infringement has to be direct, not indirect. Pointing someone to a computer that has a chunk of a file is indirect. Giving them that chunk is direct.

      Which, as I've already pointed out, is wrong in that contributory infringement is indirect, and is never direct.

      I think the context of your original comments was pretty clear, especially since you didn't even mention TPB until you responded to me.

      --
      -- This and all my posts are in the public domain. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer, and this is not legal advice.
    35. Re:The average Joe may care more in future... by cpt+kangarooski · · Score: 1

      As TPB only point to something that points to something that points to chunks of something that may be copyrighted, there's no way any sane person can call this 'direct'. It is extremely indirect, if anything.

      Yes, I know how it works, and I agree. That is indirect.

      However, the earlier poster was wrong; contributory infringement is a form of indirect infringement. In fact, it would probably cover that situation quite nicely. The other forms of indirect infringement: vicarious infringement and inducement to infringe, also might apply, depending on the specific factual scenario.

      Sweden might not have these kinds of laws. I don't know. But the US does, and TPB would easily have been shut down for illegal activity had it been in the US.

      It is quite similar to Napster, in fact, which never directly infringed, but did provide pointers to users to one anothers' computers so that they could infringe. Napster was found liable for this indirect infringement.

      Your problem is, you didn't closely read my post. I never said that TPB was a direct infringer, I said that contributory infringement is a kind of indirect infringement.

      I hope that when the legal repercussions of that raid are settled, TPB moves back to Sweden where it will be protected against repeats due to the fallout of this affair. The raid itself was illegal, the minister of justice's involvement in the warrant was highly illegal and the execution of the raid was a massive abuse of power, complete with the covered cameras, 200 servers removed without warrant, and the refusal of the police to comment to the press on the many issues at hand.

      Actually, we don't really know that. I don't know whether TPB has been operating legally or illegally, given the laws of Sweden, since I'm unfamiliar with those laws. I bet you're unfamiliar with those laws too. I wouldn't rely on TPB as a source of accurate information about those laws, as they are far from disinterested in this. What we really need is a Swedish copyright lawyer to discuss the subject.

      --
      -- This and all my posts are in the public domain. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer, and this is not legal advice.
    36. Re:The average Joe may care more in future... by cpt+kangarooski · · Score: 1

      the choice of "The Police" as an example

      That just wouldn't count against them. But it wouldn't count for them, either.

      --
      -- This and all my posts are in the public domain. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer, and this is not legal advice.
    37. Re:The average Joe may care more in future... by tomhudson · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I think a lot of people here aren't looking at the bigger picture. Whether you like it or not, the vast majority of the international community in the western world does agree on some basic legal principles: ...

      ... and the overarching principle in international law is the sovereignty of nations to govern their own internal affairs, set their own laws, etc. The US getting the Swedes to violate their own laws and procedures is in direct contradiction to this.

      Unfortunately, the US seems to think that it can still play the superpower game, when in fact its more of a "first among equals" situation.

      Remember, 95% of the planet doesn't live in the US, and isn't governed by US law or practices. With the international flow of information, etc, we can cherrypick our virtual location on a case-by-case basis. For example, want to criticize country A? Set up a server in country B. Want to criticize country B? Set up a server in country A.

      Corporations have long been doing the "cherry-pick a jurisdiction" for all sorts of things, from labour to legal venue. They're pissed off because now the average Joe can and is taking the same loopholes.

      Being relistic (I know, this is slashdot, so realism may be seen as extremely off topic), the whole **AA problem is the result of an industry that was, historically speaking, for most of its existence, a decentralized cottage industry, that for a short time, thanks to advances in technology over the last century, became a big, "manufacturing-type" business, and is now in danger of returning to being decentralized again thanks to further advances in tech, and people's refusal to let themselves be manipulated the way they used to be.

      What are they going to do in 20 years when we don't need singers, actors, key grips, cameramen, etc. ... when everything can be simulated by a hobbyist sitting at a keyboard, and when virtual worlds have more grip than a "stupid linear movie"? The answer - they won't do anything - they'll be gone.

      TV, movies and music are already losing people to the net, games, etc. This is because there are still only 167 hours in a week, and every hour spent online or playing a game is an hour less to watch TV or see a movie.

      On a related note, Nintendo's Wii is probably going to hurt Sony's entertainment business as a whole, as its pitched at the general population, and will drag millions more to spend more time playing rather than watching Sony's library of movie properties. The idea behind blu-ray or an hdtv player in a console is to "tie in" other forms of entertainment. People are going to vote with their wallets.

      If Hollywood wants to continue to compete, they're going to have to justify their access to the consumer's most valuable resource - time. So far this year, they haven't - their movies suck to the point where even downloaders don't want to bother, its a waste of bandwidth and disk space and TIME.

      Like I said, time is your most precious asset, and what they want. Ask yourself this - will movie theatres even exist 20 years from now, when the average consumer will have a 10-foot wall screen, surround sound and immersive environments where people can meet, party, and play? Or are they going to go the way of the drive-in, bulldozed to make way for housing.

    38. Re:The average Joe may care more in future... by tomhudson · · Score: 1

      The same as any other name. cf Shakespeare "a rose by any other name".

      Judges have to back up their decisions based on facts relevent to the case at hand (in this case, did a copyright violatoon occur), not on the name of the entity, or a logo. In this case, it will be (in no particular order)

      1. Is hosting a torrent file is itself a violation of swedish law?
      If not, then that's it - "not guilty."

      ... or ...

      2. Has the defense presented any compelling argument (eg other case law, contradictory statutes, etc) that the law isn't directly applicable in this particular case?
      If so, then again, "not guilty" (note - "compelling argument", not just an argument, but one sufficient to convince the court).

      ... or ...

      3. Has the defence made a compelling argument that the case itself is tainted to the point where trying it is not possible (tainted or questionable evidence, violation of rules of procedure, violaton of suspects legal rights, etc). If so, not guilty.

      From what we've already heard, they're going to get a walk on the basis of point #3, as all the evidence in the raid will probably get tossed out.

    39. Re:The average Joe may care more in future... by cpt+kangarooski · · Score: 1

      ... and the overarching principle in international law is the sovereignty of nations to govern their own internal affairs, set their own laws, etc.

      Sure, and I'd like to see the various copyright treaties abolished so that we could return to the time when countries set up their own laws to suit themselves. I would hope only that they would unilaterally offer national treatment and avoid conflicts whereby an author couldn't have a copyright in two countries at once.

      Nevertheless, there are common areas of agreement in western legal traditions, and the original poster was more or less on target.

      --
      -- This and all my posts are in the public domain. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer, and this is not legal advice.
    40. Re:The average Joe may care more in future... by cpt+kangarooski · · Score: 1

      Judges have to back up their decisions based on facts relevent to the case at hand (in this case, did a copyright violatoon occur), not on the name of the entity, or a logo.

      And as I've pointed out, in the US at least, the name and logo are relevant facts under the inducement theory of copyright infringement. Perhaps things are different in Sweden, but certainly it's not correct to say that names or logos would never be relevant.

      --
      -- This and all my posts are in the public domain. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer, and this is not legal advice.
    41. Re:The average Joe may care more in future... by Anonymous+Brave+Guy · · Score: 1

      Funnily enough, YOU are missing the even bigger picture.

      Perhaps I am. I'm not arrogant enough to presume my opinion is the only valid one, nor is that opinion set in stone such that no amount of evidence will change my mind. But let's look at the specifics you mentioned, and I'll try to explain why after a lot of thought I've come to my current position on this subject.

      People don't care about this crime. There is a vast discrepancy between copyright law and the general opinion about it in the entire western world.

      I'm really not sure that's true. There's a vast discrepancy between copyright law and the general opinion about it in posts on Slashdot, but Slashdot is not representative of the population at large. If you look at, for example, the changes to the Australian copyright system announced by their Attorney-General last month, I suspect most of us would consider them to be at least a step in the right direction. More significantly, the AG's office also published on their web site a large number of responses to their earlier inquiry that led to these changes. If you look at the comments by members of the public, and indeed the survey results about public and industry views on fair use in the submission by the Australian Consumers' Association, then the overwhelming majority in both groups believed that reasonable personal uses should be legal, and believed that distribution to others without permission should not be legal. As far as I'm aware, this is the largest recent enquiry on the subject, at least until the British Gowers Review publishes the submissions it received and its own recommendations this autumn. The methodology was also not entirely scientific, but the results are surely more indicative than random conjecture based on Slashdot comments.

      The reason copyright law looks the way it does is because of the effort of a very small copyright lobby. Their propositions go unopposed because people don't care. 90 years? Fine, whatever.

      I think this is getting into straw man territory. We're talking about P2P, and specifically BitTorrent. The stuff that gets ripped widely on P2P isn't stuff that would have entered the public domain but for recent copyright extensions, but rather a lot of recent music, movies, games and the like. This would have been illegal in most places long before the DMCA and friends came along.

      Copyright infringement is not an important crime in the people's opinion, and it's definitely not something you would impose trade sanctions for.

      Be careful here. I'm all for giving the people the vote and running a country in a suitably democratic fashion, but democracy only works in the presence of an informed and rational population, and as the saying goes, a person is smart, but people are stupid. There are countless examples where naive and/or selfish thinking makes the population favour one approach, yet clear evidence on which experts pretty much universally agree favours another. There are also countless examples where public perception differs widely from reality: look at how many people in the US currently think Saddam Hussein was directly responsible for 9/11, or how many people in the UK think that certain types of crime are rising when in fact they are falling or vice versa.

      Economics is one area with abundant examples of this, and copyright is basically an economic principle: it creates an artificial market

      --
      If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
    42. Re:The average Joe may care more in future... by Anonymous+Brave+Guy · · Score: 1
      And I don't recall the public outcry over 'illegal' copying that led to the DMCA, somehow it seems like a lot of laws just come out special interests with money over the will of the people ...

      I think you're missing the point here. The wholesale infringement of copyright law by a minority of people was always illegal. New technology made it easier and more damaging for those people to break the law. A new law was passed that was a rather draconian response to this. The underlying principles didn't change, and frankly, I have little sympathy with those who break the law as it used to be and then bitch about newer, "nastier" laws being introduced to penalise them more for doing it.

      --
      If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
    43. Re:The average Joe may care more in future... by Surt · · Score: 1

      No, my point is that it should never have been 'illegal' in the first place. And there was no public outcry, ever, demanding that it be so in the first place. It was always small groups of people with money lording it over the rest of us, infringing our rights, paying people with guns to force us to do things their way.

      --
      "Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking
    44. Re:The average Joe may care more in future... by Anonymous+Brave+Guy · · Score: 1
      I don't know whether TPB has been operating legally or illegally, given the laws of Sweden, since I'm unfamiliar with those laws. I bet you're unfamiliar with those laws too. I wouldn't rely on TPB as a source of accurate information about those laws, as they are far from disinterested in this. What we really need is a Swedish copyright lawyer to discuss the subject.

      That would be interesting.

      However, I think a lot of the other posters here have missed the point of my original "international agreements" post anyway. I wasn't commenting on either the legality of the actions in Sweden, nor the appropriateness of the response. My real point was that if the laws in Sweden don't reflect the general international concensus, and Sweden is allowing people to take advantage of those laws in ways that other countries perceive as damaging, then it would not be surprising if the international community started imposing some sort of counter-effect at some stage. This would be damaging to Sweden, and therefore it is not surprising that the Swedish authorities want to be seen to be at least reasonably cooperative, which may be the reasoning behind this action.

      It will presumably be unfortunate for the Swedish authorities if they are trapped between the rock of international pressure and the hard place of their own legislation here. I would not be surprised to find that far from being a victory for TPB and its supporters, the fall-out from this affair actually results in some sort of devious introduction of more restrictive laws for everyone, on the back of some argument about international pressure. As the Slashbots are keen to point out whenever it suits their argument, legality and morality are not the same thing, but laws can be changed much more easily...

      --
      If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
    45. Re:The average Joe may care more in future... by Anonymous+Brave+Guy · · Score: 1

      Most laws are formed as a result of an argument made by someone who feels damaged, not by a public outcry. When was the public outcry over complex tax evasion schemes? Over driving without insurance? For those who live in nations with written constitutions, how many of them were written by a committee drawn from among the general population, and how many were written by the leaders and lawyers as they thought best served the interests of the population?

      If you removed copyright tomorrow, then no doubt there would be a huge cheer from much of the population, as they happily ripped films and music saving themselves a fortune. What the picture would look like in a few years' time, however, is the more important question. Those who oppose copyright and chant the "information wants to be free" mantra think it would make no difference or even be an improvement. Apparently, in their world there are arists who coul afford to continue to create and distribute the same depth, variety and quality of works we have today, without the guarantee of any compensation in return.

      What I've never understood about that vision is why, if there are so many generous and capable artists in the world, we don't already see them giving away all these high quality works for free today, killing off the commercial industry in the process. What we do see is that a lot of people volunteer a part of their time. That means you get a lot of small works, of varying quality but some no doubt very good. You can also get major works in the mainstream, as some of the popular open source applications have demonstrated, again of very variable quality but some very good. But I'll believe in the whole dream when I see the same number of freely available alternatives for all of the commercial software products I've ever worked on in my career, not just office applications and OS/comms tools that have a potential market of millions of people, and when bookshops start closing down because there's so much equally good material available freely on-line that no-one buys from the big publishers any more.

      --
      If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
    46. Re:The average Joe may care more in future... by tomhudson · · Score: 1

      A judge would laugh you out of court in most countries with that argument.

      I remember watching one case where the prosecutor's witness (a cop) got his knuckles rapped by the judge for trying to introduce non-fact "evidence" about the defendent by trying to use the defendents' bumper stickers to allude that he was more likely to have committed the offence.

      Would you seriously put forward the proposition that someone is more likely to have committed a crime because they have a bumper sticker that says "mother-in-law in trunk"?

      The judge properly made it quite clear that the only evidence he wanted to hear was the facts pertinent to the case. Logos and corporate names are not fact evidence showing intent, any more than "Pittsburgh Pirates".

      Bringing irrelevancies into a case only shows a judge (or jury) that your case is weak. If this is the only evidence of intent, good luck with your "legal career", because, by introducing the web site into evidence, you've opened the door for allowing equal probitive value for the rest of the site's contents, which make the case that the web site itself is not an infraction of the law, that it contains no copyright material, and that they do not themselves distribute copyrighted material.

      They've made it quite clear in their "legal notices" archive, and you can bet that, at any trial, that will be introduced to counter any "intent" argument the police will make, logo, name,or whatever.

      My money is on TPB to win.

      In fact, TPB has already won where it counts - in showing that the **AA do NOT play by the rules, they've undermined any moral argument that the **AA can make to end users that their rights should be respected. People don't like hypocrisy, especially hypocrisy from rich multinationals.

    47. Re:The average Joe may care more in future... by Buran · · Score: 1

      You can't really expect the rest of the world to stand by and let this happen.

      They have no choice in the matter unless they are going to disrespect sovereignty, which is as wrong as a forced invasion a la Iraq/Kuwait in 1991 and Germany/Poland in 1939. Since Sweden is a sovereign nation with its own laws, it doesn't matter what the US or any other nation wants -- it doesn't have the right to make those choices. The Swedish people, and the Swedish government, are the only ones who can do that.

      So yes, I do expect the rest of the world to stand by and let it happen.

  40. still scary though by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    yeah but having travelled around the world the USA is the only place I've been held up by police at gun point and their opening words have been "we think you're smuggling drugs, boy". Scary way to meet the authorities as a tourist... I drove like a maniac the next day to make sure I was out of Texas when it was time to look for a motel....

  41. No one to root for by Reality+Master+101 · · Score: 2, Insightful
    The biggest annoyance about this is that everyone is a bad guy who is involved in this:

    1) TPB sucks, because they're just leechers making money off of other people's copyrighted work, all the while disengenuously crowing about "freedom".

    2) The MPAA sucks, because of their tactics

    3) Sweden sucks because they allowed themselves to be a tool of the USA

    4) The USA sucks, because of their overreaction to file sharing, and being a tool of the MPAA.

    5) Slashdot sucks, because most people here don't see the immorality of file sharing, and don't see that incredibly expensive shows like 24 and Lost WON'T EXIST if they can't make money. We might actually be seeing the fall of good video programming. It may not exist in 10 years, except for amateur junk.

    *sigh*

    --
    Sometimes it's best to just let stupid people be stupid.
    1. Re:No one to root for by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How does TPB make money?

    2. Re:No one to root for by japhering · · Score: 1
      5) Slashdot sucks, because most people here don't see the immorality of file sharing, and don't see that incredibly expensive shows like 24 and Lost WON'T EXIST if they can't make money. We might actually be seeing the fall of good video programming. It may not exist in 10 years, except for amateur junk.


      Excuse me? What good video programming? There hasn't been good programming for atleast
      a decade on a majority of the networks and those few that did are quickly following in the
      foot steps of the those that didn't.
    3. Re:No one to root for by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      On the contrary. In fact, Fox recently announced that they have inked a deal with Apple to release episodes of 24 over iTunes at two bucks a pop. Considering that most BT trackers on the pirate circuit are dead or dying within a week or so of their release, you tell me where else I can find all five seasons of 24 online?

      It sounds like some networks are finally catching on. And considering their seemingly limitless resources, they could easily edge out bit torrent pirates. What would you rather do, download an episode for two bucks at high speed, or wait a week downloading for free from a tracker that is a month old and only has three or four seeders/leechers?

    4. Re:No one to root for by linvir · · Score: 5, Insightful
      incredibly expensive shows like 24 and Lost WON'T EXIST if they can't make money
      Welcome to the world of tomorrow! They'll adapt their business model eventually, and they'll start making shows available online. Or they'll keep their hands clamped over their ears and shout "LALALALA!" louder and louder until they go out of business. You're one of these people who thinks that it's the customer's duty to give a shit about producers, and that's just not the way it's supposed to work.
    5. Re:No one to root for by dapyx · · Score: 2, Interesting

      They're not making any money. They have just some advertising as they need money to buy new servers and pay the bandwidth costs. These things aren't cheap at all. Remember, they had almost 100 servers confiscated by the police...

      --
      I'm sorry, the number you have dialed is an imaginary number. Please rotate your phone 90 degrees and dial again.
    6. Re:No one to root for by linvir · · Score: 1

      Supposedly through their ads, but I find it doubtful that a profit making site would have a 'Donate' link.

    7. Re:No one to root for by Oscar_Wilde · · Score: 1

      We might actually be seeing the fall of good video programming. It may not exist in 10 years, except for amateur junk.
       
      As someone who enjoys theatre (both professional and amateur) much more, let me be the first to say good riddance. There's very little good video programming that actually seems good without the hype.

      Why yes I am a snob. Thanks for asking.

    8. Re:No one to root for by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      I don't care if they were terribly expensive, both shows were crap to begin with. The same with all recent mainstream television media. The only show I can stomache to watch anymore is CSI, and that's only the Las Vegas one.

      Everything else is deluded idiotic drivel as far as I'm concerned. Except for some of the specials on the history channel, or discovery channel. Perhaps instead of spending so much money on effects and actors, they should invest heavily in SCRIPT WRITERS. Anymore the commercials are becoming more witty than the shows themselves. Nowadays, you watch the show for the commercials. Remember when you use to wish you could just fastforward through them?

      On top of it all, the shows get paid by the stations who make the money from the advertisers, who make the money from the manufacturers, who make the money from selling the product to consumers, who make the money from working throughout the ladder. Last article I read about TV Show Season DVD sales said that it was all just extra cream for the production companys to begin with, and that's not surprising considering they want $60+ for a dvd set.

      So this immorality you speak of is one sided in my opinion. Do I feel morally obligated to download the latest episode of unliscensed anime? No, but I don't feel the least bit bad about it whatsoever. But wait! What's the difference? It's liscensed to someone in Japan. Just cause an american company hasn't bought distributor rights in america it's ok? So if I was in Brussels, or Russia, or Australia, and 24 was still new and hadn't been passed around to other media conglomerates yet, it would be okay for me to download the show there? However, if I'm in america, and I downloaded the latest show that I couldn't see cause I had to go to court, cause the city council suddenly decided for me on a closed ballot that smoking in a public venue is illegal, that I should feel ashamed? Piss off, I've got other bigger problems that I should feel ashamed about, like being unable to find a decent job that brings me to being gainfully employed. Instead of scraping by paycheck to paycheck.

    9. Re:No one to root for by achurch · · Score: 2, Interesting
      6) Reality Master 101 sucks, because he's let the content industry convince him that their way is the only way.

      (Sorry, but you asked for it . . .)

    10. Re:No one to root for by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can fuck right off if you expect me to pay $20 for every two episodes of a show when they release it on DVD initally. And Im not waiting for five years after the show ends to get the whole season DVD's either. Until the TV makers sort this shit out they dont deserve a penny.

    11. Re:No one to root for by EvilIdler · · Score: 1

      About point 5:
      The creators of Lost have threatened to keep the show going on and on ad nauseam.
      Would you *really* want that to happen? Six seasons of nothing happening?

    12. Re:No one to root for by Reality+Master+101 · · Score: 1
      You're one of these people who thinks that it's the customer's duty to give a shit about producers, and that's just not the way it's supposed to work.

      I 'give a shit' that there is an environment such that people can make money, because without it, the programming THAT I WANT won't exist. It's called 'self interest'. I don't care about them personally, I care about myself.

      --
      Sometimes it's best to just let stupid people be stupid.
    13. Re:No one to root for by stud9920 · · Score: 1
      5) Slashdot sucks, because most people here don't see the immorality of file sharing,
      If most people don't see the immorality of something, is the thing still immoral ?
      and don't see that incredibly expensive shows like 24 and Lost WON'T EXIST if they can't make money. We might actually be seeing the fall of good video programming. It may not exist in 10 years, except for amateur junk.
      Those cliffhanger shows make money because people whant to know what will happen next, and can't wait until someone strips the commercials breaks (the fucking "one hour an episode" of 24 is actually "41 minutes an episode" because of commercials) and. People watch them when they get aired. Announcers pay millions of dollars for the shows. Then a few months later th DVDs come out. Die hard fans buy them. Then the DVD price lowers, lesser fans buy them. Then it gets serialized with magazines for even cheaper. All the while, money gets in.
      There is always a price point at which people will want to use parts of their income to buy DVDs. Guess what, sometimes that price is zero. Will the provider sell it for 0 ? No, because it is not profitable. Some OMG EVIL PIRATES do that. Most of the downloaders would not have paid for the contents anyway, or not until the contents gets released at their acceptable price point. I actually DID buy the serialized 24 day 1 DVDs when they became cheap, even though I could have copied my brother's copies; I was just too lazy to copy them.
      Premium content survived the VCR, it will survive the internet.
    14. Re:No one to root for by Reality+Master+101 · · Score: 1
      They're not making any money. They have just some advertising as they need money to buy new servers and pay the bandwidth costs. These things aren't cheap at all. Remember, they had almost 100 servers confiscated by the police...

      They have a HUNDRED SERVERS and you think they're not making money? How naive you are.

      --
      Sometimes it's best to just let stupid people be stupid.
    15. Re:No one to root for by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Let me just say that if you feel that the loss of 24 is something to regret there's something wrong.

    16. Re:No one to root for by linvir · · Score: 1
      All that anyone needs is demand, and there's plenty of that. It's just shifting to a different format and a different distribution model. There will be rampant piracy until they step up and give us what we want. And if your current overlords fail, fear not, because more deserving people will happily seize the juicy gap in the market with both hands, and you'll have your precious programming anyway.

      And guess what? It's all already proceeding according to my prophecy.

    17. Re:No one to root for by Nybarius · · Score: 0

      Re: #4 and #5 --- you think that filesharing is going to lead to the end of quality video programming within a decade, and it's the USA who's overreacting about file-sharing? I hate to say it, but: LoL.

    18. Re:No one to root for by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "5) Slashdot sucks, because most people here don't see the immorality of file sharing, and don't see that incredibly expensive shows like 24 and Lost WON'T EXIST if they can't make money. We might actually be seeing the fall of good video programming. It may not exist in 10 years, except for amateur junk."

      Bull. I've gotten used to watching TV a lot in the last 8 years (I used to read, listen to music, but like TV for now), and once the "reality show" phenomenon got over, anyone could see TV shows have gotten increasingly better than prior years (and at a rate of improvement that's increased).

      imo, that is largely because of the diversity of media we have available today--they've had to compete..against movies, PC and console games, DVDs, internet surfing/email in general, and online downloads.

      And while I can easily download torrents of 24 (I don't like Lost but can see that shows appeal), I don't--I'd rather watch it in high def or on unadulterated un-compressed broadcast or cable tv, the former which *is* free btw (24 on Fox is broadcast free over the air).

      Furthermore, I know if my PVR or DVR bites it and I miss the normal show time, I can download it, which means I'm *more* likely to watch shows like Prison Break and 24, shows which are sequential in nature (as opposed to more episodic (self-contained per episode) shows; if you miss an episode of 24, you can continue but there may be gaps).

      Pirating? That's a DAMN GOOD THING for me, a regular consumer. I think shows have gotten better. Not to mention, rather innovative--while I don't like the show at all, you have to more or less watch American Idol if you want to participate usefully, and while a talent show these days is of no consequence, the voting and advertising on the show is of some interests.

    19. Re:No one to root for by harlows_monkeys · · Score: 3, Insightful
      Welcome to the world of tomorrow! They'll adapt their business model eventually, and they'll start making shows available online. Or they'll keep their hands clamped over their ears and shout "LALALALA!" louder and louder until they go out of business. You're one of these people who thinks that it's the customer's duty to give a shit about producers, and that's just not the way it's supposed to work

      Wow...you sure completely missed his point. Yes, they'll adapt their business models, to only produce those kind of shows that can make money even when widely pirated. His point is that this class of shows will include fewer, if any, good shows.

      TV and movies are not like music, where the artists make most of their money outside of sales of the music (e.g., bands make their money from their concerts).

      Piracy fails the "what if everyone did it?" test. When it is a small, underground activity, it likely actually helps music and movie and TV revenue, by acting as advertising. If it becomes the mainstream way of getting content, however, then it does make it uneconomical for the producers of content (except for news and for programs where the view interacts with the show, such as by voting on what contestants win or lose).

    20. Re:No one to root for by aaribaud · · Score: 1
      They have a HUNDRED SERVERS and you think they're not making money? How naive you are.

      Well, I my world at least, when a hundred servers are running your site, you shell out money for them to. Talk about naive, now.
    21. Re:No one to root for by daff2k · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "5) Slashdot sucks, because most people here don't see the immorality of file sharing, and don't see that incredibly expensive shows like 24 and Lost WON'T EXIST if they can't make money. We might actually be seeing the fall of good video programming. It may not exist in 10 years, except for amateur junk."

      I've always been wondering about that kind of argument.

      Let's say I download 24 or Lost. Let's say many more people download 24 or Lost. What does that do to keep these shows from appearing on national television or any of the cable channels here in my country (Austria)?

      24's season 5 is scheduled some time this fall on no less than two channels I receive and I'm sure Lost will be seen as well. I've never heard of a show either being cancelled while on because of file sharers who download episodes, nor have I heard of a show not being broadcast on other channels in other countries because of file sharers who download episodes.

      On the contrary, I pay my fees and taxes and whatnot for national and cable TV no matter whether I watch any of those expensive shows or not. So what's the difference where I watch it, TV or downloaded? Fox gets paid for 24 by the TV stations who show it and they get their money from their users, subscribers, taxes, ads, whatever.

      Seriously, where does anyone loose money here? I've been asking that myself for quite some time now.

      And despite the popularity of TPB, BitTorrent and file sharing, people who do file sharing are still a tiny minority compared to those that regularily watch such TV shows on their regular channels.

      --
      And which parallel universe did you crawl out of?
    22. Re:No one to root for by vertinox · · Score: 5, Insightful

      5) Slashdot sucks, because most people here don't see the immorality of file sharing, and don't see that incredibly expensive shows like 24 and Lost WON'T EXIST if they can't make money. We might actually be seeing the fall of good video programming. It may not exist in 10 years, except for amateur junk.

      You were pretty good up to this point...

      And I must say I support file sharing exactly for this reason.

      I want mass media to die an ugly death!

      Lost to me (although better than most other crap they put on television) still represents what makes me ill about television. Maybe I'm just bitter over "Enteprise's" failure or the cancelation of "Firefly" but I am disgusted by most cookie cutter music and lame stories that make no sense and waste millions of dollars to make movies and TV shows that are unoriginal and could be made by an ad lib script.

      The only thing I bother today is Adult Swim on Cartoon network because of the imported Anime... Heck... My movie collection is nothing but foreign films because some reason... When you don't have kiss butt to a hollywood director and fix script problems with CGI and million dollar actors... You are forced to make entertainment the hard way. (Which is why I love fan fics remakes of star trek).

      If these moguls lost quit making emo boy bands and crap movies... The world would be a better place.

      If no one made money from art, then only true artists would make art... Plain and simple. Of course they'd be starving and need patrons like they did in the Middle Ages, but Da Vinci made quite a living without the need for copyrights of his work.

      Maybe I'm an art house bourgeois uppity bastard who only like foreign films, but I'd like for one day in my life to be able to turn on the radio or TV and see something that is more than just "entertainment". I'd like to see art.

      --
      "I am the king of the Romans, and am superior to rules of grammar!"
      -Sigismund, Holy Roman Emperor (1368-1437)
    23. Re:No one to root for by xigxag · · Score: 4, Insightful

      1) TPB sucks, because they're just leechers making money off of other people's copyrighted work, all the while disengenuously crowing about "freedom".

      I suppose Used Booksellers are leeches in your eyes as well. Should we shut them down too?

      incredibly expensive shows like 24 and Lost WON'T EXIST if they can't make money.

      How does filesharing substantially hurt 24 and Lost? The shows have already aired and made their money by the time they get onto filesharing sites.

      Honestly, if networks and cable companies would get together and allow rebroadcasting on demand of major shows, the vast majority of people would simply do that if they missed a broadcast. Or they could allow downloading of the show off their website, complete with commercials, in a time-limited "secure" format that would expire, say, a month after initial broadcast date, so as not to interfere with DVD sales. Most downloaders would probably go for something in pristine quality that would be easy to locate and download, over the dubious quality of an anonymous fileshare.

      Anyway, the point is that this is not about making money. There are plenty of ways for them to make money off the internet with their shows, as they are beginning to discover. This is about control. The suits have shown over and over again that they resist any attempt to lessen their total control over the distribution of their product, even when it can make money for them. They have to be dragged kicking and screaming every step of the way.

      --
      There are two kinds of people: 1) those who start arrays with one and 1) those who start them with zero.
    24. Re:No one to root for by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Exactly. The producers don't give a shit about the "consumers" anyway, so it's also karma.

    25. Re:No one to root for by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      MP3s, MPEGs, etc., are all numbers. Very big numbers, to be sure, but an MP3 is just a number. Claiming ownership over a number and various permutations of it is completely immoral. Who cares that it is their business model? It is still bullshit.

      Demanding ownership rights over intangibles is wrong.

    26. Re:No one to root for by ultranova · · Score: 1

      1) TPB sucks, because they're just leechers making money off of other people's copyrighted work, all the while disengenuously crowing about "freedom".

      Really ? I was unaware that TPB was selling any copyrighted works. I was under the impression that they gave access to their services for free.

      Besides, did the shareholders of the MPAA member corporations produce the movies MPAA gets its money from by themselves ? No ? Then they are making money of other people's copyrighted work, now aren't they ? Or Disney, who keeps on ripping off various fairytales...

      5) Slashdot sucks, because most people here don't see the immorality of file sharing,

      File sharing is not immoral.

      don't see that incredibly expensive shows like 24 and Lost WON'T EXIST if they can't make money.

      Consequently, we can conlcude that since they do exist, piracy obviously hasn't made it impossible to make money with them.

      We might actually be seeing the fall of good video programming. It may not exist in 10 years, except for amateur junk.

      No television show has had the power to draw me to the tube for years anymore. The old live-action Batman show, and Babylon 5 - that's about it. And B5 was mostly crap, it were the few non-crap episodes that kept my interest. It's just a superior way to relax to read a Pratchett novel on my garden and sunning myself. I especially liked the one where it Holy Woods moving pictures acted as gateways for tentacled monsters from Beyond - very appropriate for this discussion >;).

      Not television, not movies... the only interesting videos nowadays come from the Internet.

      Television is dead, long live Internet video piracy !

      BTW. You suck because you use a lame substitute instead of the real HTML OL tag.

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

    27. Re:No one to root for by Reality+Master+101 · · Score: 1
      Well, I my world at least, when a hundred servers are running your site, you shell out money for them to. Talk about naive, now.

      Yes... and where do you think the money comes from? Do you think the money was left by Swedish elves? Do you think they spent every last penny of the money they have on servers?

      --
      Sometimes it's best to just let stupid people be stupid.
    28. Re:No one to root for by frogstar_robot · · Score: 1

      Maybe I'm an art house bourgeois uppity bastard who only like foreign films, but I'd like for one day in my life to be able to turn on the radio or TV and see something that is more than just "entertainment". I'd like to see art.

      You won't get art. You won't even get entertainment that has a shred of respect for your intelligence. Once these MPAA and RIAA goons finish taking a foot howitzer to themselves, others with a more realistic grasp of how the media markets now work will step up. What they produce will be mostly pap because the appetite for pap is bottomless.

      If you're lucky, they'll be able to more efficiently serve smaller markets made up of people like yourselves. You may have an easier and cheaper time filling out your art house film collection but the mass market outlets like TV will continue to carry Joe Sixpack friendly fare. It sucks but that is the way it will be.

      There is one bright spot. After the xxAA suffer their little apocalypse, there will be a period where the money to make blockbusters like Spiderman 2 and remakes of The Posieden Adventure won't be available. Such sums of money absolutely demand a sure fire return. This leads to less risk taking by the likes of Kubrick, Spielburg, and Lucas and that means comic book franchises and endless remakes of past successes. So what you will have is a host of smaller productions that will at least have to employ some originality to stand out from the rest. I think you can safely hope for a little originality anyway.

    29. Re:No one to root for by Hackeron · · Score: 1

      I think in this scenario it is the lesser of 2 evils, I pick thepiratebay and glad to see them victorious over the MPAA.

    30. Re:No one to root for by Tim+C · · Score: 1, Insightful

      While it's not your duty to "give a shit about producers", if you actually like the programs they produce then it's certainly enlightened self interest to care. If they can't make money, they can't make more programs, and you don't get to watch them.

    31. Re:No one to root for by Peaker · · Score: 1

      Hmm.

      To choose between freedom and "Lost".

      I choose freedom, what do you choose?

    32. Re:No one to root for by babbling · · Score: 2, Insightful

      There's barely any adapting to be done. People already download shows off the internet. All networks need to do is legitimize it and throw in some ads that aren't worth removing. All of a sudden, they would have adapted their model to file sharing.

      That's not the end of it, though. I think this model has many other ways of making money. For example, the fact that TV shows are distributed online means that many more people will start hitting television network websites, looking for the downloads. There's no reason why those websites can't have banner ads to generate extra revenue (just like The Pirate Bay does), show-related games that keep people on the website, show-related ringtones for people to buy via SMS, and so on.

      The television networks are actually crazy for not embracing this.

    33. Re:No one to root for by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Until the TV makers sort this shit out they dont deserve a penny.

      What kind of circle-jerk logic is that ? Sounds like your argument is that the content owners are infringing on your God-given right to obtain their content for free.

      Pony up or stfu.

    34. Re:No one to root for by GroeFaZ · · Score: 1

      5) Slashdot sucks, because most people here don't see the immorality of file sharing, and don't see that incredibly expensive shows like 24 and Lost WON'T EXIST if they can't make money. We might actually be seeing the fall of good video programming. It may not exist in 10 years, except for amateur junk.

      I see this argument popping up again and again. I can see that it's a pretty intuitive argument - if you download, you don't and won't pay to see/hear the work again - but remember that intuition and reality have always had a less-than-rock-solid relationship. Has Linux, being free and all, killed proprietary OSs, notably Windows? Has FOSS in general, or piracy, killed proprietary software? Of course not, and it won't, for the same reasons that professional entertainment won't be killed by pirating it.

      The morality of downloading may or may not be a question, but I won't discuss it, because morality doesn't feed or starve anyone, which, by and large, seems to be what it's about. Besides, as we can see (not only) from the story at hand, the "other side" as represented by the *AAs of the world at least also has some issues with generally accepted morality. So it boils down to whether piracy has a significant negative net impact on sales, i.e., a significantly larger negative than positive effect, and that's what I doubt.

      For example, can you cite, say, 3 examples of artists/companies/whatever which had to go out of business because of and only because of piracy? If you can cite such examples, can you show beyond reasonable doubt that the very act of downloading and obtaining the work has killed all incentive to buy the work, and not the insight that the work was of poor quality or simply not of the viewer's taste? What do you think of the positive advertising effect of pirated works? How do you explain that, according to this site, movies of the past ~3 years are over-represented (number of entries in a period divided by length of same period) in basically every box office chart, despite rapidly growing movie piracy in the same period? If you say "inflation", then did you just admit piracy doesn't even make a dent in sales? It would seem unlikely that the hypothetical sales growth *without* piracy had been offset by piracy so exactly that you can fully explain observed sales change by inflation.

      So, my layman advice to record labels and movie studios: If your motivation really is to protect the artists, then drop the scare campaigns and the pillory court cases and put the money into higher-quality work, sponsoring more artists instead of fewer high-profile ones; or simply cut your moon prices for a simple and easily understandable change. If people want to have what you offer, they will generally buy it and you will sell it at a profit; the die-hard pirates will not stop pirating anyway; legislative and law enforcement branches can focus on actual crime. Thus everybody can be happy. But as long as the "piracy funds terrorism and eats babies" mindset is hammered into an increasingly criminalized society, things won't change for the better, that's for sure. I very much admire the Swedish people who are protesting against this police raid, because it shows an attitude sorely lacking, at least here in Germany.

      --
      The grass is always greener on the other side of the light cone.
    35. Re:No one to root for by aaribaud · · Score: 1

      Actually, knowing how hard it is for donation-only-fed activities to, hum, stay afloat, I'm pretty sure donations don't cover all of TPB, and they probably pay for part of it out of their own pockets. What's *your* theory, inuendos apart?

    36. Re:No one to root for by bigmouth_strikes · · Score: 1

      > more deserving people will happily seize the juicy gap in the market with both hands, and you'll have your precious programming anyway.

      That's an assumption that isn't necessarily true. Here's a relevation: there may not be a juicy gap in the market. In a world where the content producers are at the mercy of the consumers with regards to whether or not the consumers elect to pay for the content, the margins may be too small to produce quality content. What we'll have is content that attract the largest possible paying amount of consumers, a least common wallet denominator. We've already seen it in Hollywood, where suckage is rampant. Luckily, well-written TV drama has stepped up to fill the void lately, but soon when they can't make any money either, we're back with TV for the idiotic masses.

      --
      Oh, I can't help quoting you because everything that you said rings true
    37. Re:No one to root for by irix · · Score: 1

      and don't see that incredibly expensive shows like 24 and Lost WON'T EXIST if they can't make money

      Let's say, hypothetically, the a friend turned me on to the CBS show The Unit during the last few episodes of the season. I record those on my PVR and watch them, but now I feel like watching the other 10 episodes I missed. What shall I do:
      1) Try and find them on summer re-runs? Good luck with that.
      2) Download them from CBS or iTunes? Nope, not available.
      3) Wait for another year or more until they are released on DVD? No thanks.
      4) Grab them from bittorrent and watch them immediately? Yup, easily done.

      What the studios have to understand is that I want to watch what I want to watch when I want to watch it. The technology exists, but legal downloads (from iTunes, etc.) are just starting to become available. When CBS decides to make episodes of The Unit available for legal download or partners with my cable company to make them available from an on-demand service then I'll gladly watch them that way. In the mean time I'm going to avail myself of the only means available to watch what I want - downloaded from bittorrent. Hypothetically.

      --

      Do you even know anything about perl? -- AC Replying to Tom Christiansen post.
    38. Re:No one to root for by MassacrE · · Score: 1

      They already could publish torrents themselves of shows with advertising embedded in them. Scared of people skipping? there is a little thing called 'product placement'. And trackers were made so you could 'track' actual usage, allowing you to immediately show advertisers how many people are watching a show. Don't forget that selling shows is a recent activity - its been 100% advertising based on all but PBS for decades.

      Instead they let other people post videos, who edit out all the commercials and provide no ability to track a show's success. In their effort to avoid a better delivery system, they are creating a need for others to do it, who in turn create a better product (same show, sans adverts)

      Movies however have much bigger problems than piracy. Nobody in hollywood can figure out that catering to markets by statistics produces content with no soul. Whether or not their content is available for free does not change that in many people's eyes, it is no longer worth money.

    39. Re:No one to root for by Tack · · Score: 1
      On the contrary, I pay my fees and taxes and whatnot for national and cable TV no matter whether I watch any of those expensive shows or not. So what's the difference where I watch it, TV or downloaded? Fox gets paid for 24 by the TV stations who show it and they get their money from their users, subscribers, taxes, ads, whatever.
      I downloaded this season of Lost and 24 off Usenet, and I'm in the same position: I pay for cable and could have watched these live, but due to timing (I recently moved and missed a bunch of episodes so I had to catch up) getting them from Usenet was easier. I asked myself the same question you did, and the most obvious answer (that came to mind immediately, so it may need to be refined) is that watching shows this way have all the ads cut from them. Overall, if more and more people watch content this way (with ads edited out), I think it's pretty likely that advertisers will notice their compaigns becoming less and less effective. As a result, the amount of money made by the stations for advertising will decrease, and this will trickle down the chain to the actual shows themselves.

      I have no idea what the numbers would be. But I think this is a realisitic result. Obviously as it is right now, grabbing series off Usenet or bt or wherever is still fringe enough that it probably doesn't affect their bottom line much, but I do believe there is a threshold (in terms of number of viewers who watch content this way) where it would affect the value of advertising.

      So the networks will have to deal with the loss, or find a better model to deal with these new trends. I don't leech episodes from Usenet because I'm cheap or broke, but because this is the model that's most convenient for me. I even pay for it (via my Usenet account), and if the networks (and movie studios too) had a model that worked for me (that didn't require me to use Windows and deal with shitty DRM'd content) then they could get my $10/mo instead of my news provider.

    40. Re:No one to root for by saleenS281 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      and you entirely missed his point. Which was: either those shows can begin to provide the content online for people who want to download it and watch it on a computer, or they can lose their ass to piracy. Most people are willing to watch a few commercials if they can download the show they want, when they want it.

      Not everyone, myself included, has time to be at their TV everyday at a given hour to watch their favorite show. I hate to break it to you, the studios aren't making any money when people Tivo either. I suppose next you'll tell us all how horrible it is when people skip the commercials using their Tivo? They can adapt their model, or they can die. Someone somewhere along the line will figure out how to provide those "expensive" shows on demand, and they'll reap the benifits. If not the current regime, then whoever replaces them. Stop being so naive and stop eating all the shit the **AA throws on your plate.

    41. Re:No one to root for by ratboy666 · · Score: 1

      Oh bother. I have to go through the "Lost" or "24" model for you.

      The producer pitches the show. It is picked up. Episodes are created. And aired. Along with the airing, commercials are added, which pay for the program. Not enough viewers? The people buying the commercials stop, and the show is then cancelled.

      If there are sufficient viewers, the show continues. Everything is already payed for. If a show makes it to around 5 seasons, it can go into syndication, which is "free money". But there is no guarantee that the show WILL go into syndication. Sometimes (like Andromeda) a show is extended by a year to allow this to happen.

      But, capturing and distributing does NOT affect the production of the show at all. After all, the shows are produced BEFORE they are aired. Suck on this idea for a while. Nothing changes -- the show is payed for by the commercial sponsors who insert commercials on the initial airing.

      The only way that this can affect the production is if the audience does NOT watch the aired program, but waits for a commercial free download to become available.

      This is mitigated by "product placement" -- Coke and Ford in American Idol, Apple in 24. Still, the people you should be concerned with are the advertisers, NOT the show producers.

      Ratboy.

      --
      Just another "Cubible(sic) Joe" 2 17 3061
    42. Re:No one to root for by LearnToSpell · · Score: 1

      TV and movies are not like music, where the artists make most of their money outside of sales of the music (e.g., bands make their money from their concerts).

      Hmm. I don't know what dreamworld you live in, but a successful tour is one where you break even. The money comes from merchandise - shirts and music sales, not from tickets. The whole financial point of a tour is to get your name out there so people buy more product.

    43. Re:No one to root for by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Screw content.
      Give me better news.

    44. Re:No one to root for by students · · Score: 1

      "Amateur Junk?" I've found amateur work to be very good at times. And if studios were not making television shows, amateurs would be more motivated because more people would watch their work. And it would not be so bad if people stopped watching videos, would it? Maybe they would do more work, or be more involved in their communities.

    45. Re:No one to root for by LocalH · · Score: 1

      No, he's saying that the season box sets should come out the day after the last episode in the season airs, more or less. For some shows that might not be practical, but a lot of the non-topical shows are in the can before the season even begins, giving the production company plenty of time to massage the video into DVD MPEG-2 and wrap some menus, subtitles, and extra features around them.

      --
      FC Closer
    46. Re:No one to root for by Paradigma11 · · Score: 1

      sorry, but the "what if everyone did it?" test fails the reality check. people are not homogenous and certainly not predictable. there is no everyone. its far more probable that there are people who will download and those who won't, no matter what. if the absolute numbers of paying consumers will be enough to support the business modell will be seen. or do you want to make a moral argument in the spirit of the categorical imperative?

    47. Re:No one to root for by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We've lived from the Garden of Eden up until the late 19th century without copyright. What the hell changed that we can't live like that anymore?

    48. Re:No one to root for by Surt · · Score: 1

      Actually, making money even in the everyone pirates model is straightforward. You move to a 100% product placement advertising model, and/or run advertisements using overlays on the content.

      There's no particular reason to believe you can't make shows and movies just as expensive this way.

      --
      "Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking
    49. Re:No one to root for by Surt · · Score: 1

      Well, you pay your fees and taxes now, because you have a TV service presumably (forgive my ignorance of Australian law). In the US at least, we don't have to pay for TV unless we subscribe to cable of satellite service. And if we all chose to download our shows, there would be no need to pay for that service.

      But more realistically, the distributions of shows by download don't contain the advertisements, and that is where the real funding for the shows come from. If no one watches the ads, there is no money to make shows.

      Which of course makes Tivo just as evil as file downloading.

      --
      "Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking
    50. Re:No one to root for by jafac · · Score: 1

      His point is that this class of shows will include fewer, if any, good shows.

      And good riddance.

      --

      These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
    51. Re:No one to root for by Tweekster · · Score: 1

      Maybe it is immoral to you, however your beliefs of morality are not universal.

      on a side note, if you are using Lost and 24 as examples of quality programming, god help us all.

      And since when has TV pirates even made a hint of a dent in any money being made.
      I am sure if you talk to the TV studio they will claim that 4 trillion dollars of their deserved profits were stolen away while those nasty pirates anally raped their grandmothers all while pouring sugar in their gas tanks.

      --
      The phrase "more better" is acceptable English. suck it grammar Nazis
    52. Re:No one to root for by Reality+Master+101 · · Score: 1
      Actually, knowing how hard it is for donation-only-fed activities to, hum, stay afloat, I'm pretty sure donations don't cover all of TPB, and they probably pay for part of it out of their own pockets. What's *your* theory, inuendos apart?

      You know, you might actually *visit* the site you're defending. I counted no less than FOUR ads on one of the pages I browsed.

      --
      Sometimes it's best to just let stupid people be stupid.
    53. Re:No one to root for by frank_adrian314159 · · Score: 1
      incredibly expensive shows like 24 and Lost WON'T EXIST if they can't make money

      Last I heard, producers were doing fine with money derived from commercial ads during their first network runs, subsequent overseas network syndication, domestic cable channel syndication, and independent OTA syndication. Oddly enough, I haven't seen any decrease in these traditional revenue streams due to the availability of shows via download or via DVD. Something tells me these guys are still making money all along the chain.

      --
      That is all.
    54. Re:No one to root for by GroeFaZ · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Wow...you sure completely missed his point. Yes, they'll adapt their business models, to only produce those kind of shows that can make money even when widely pirated. His point is that this class of shows will include fewer, if any, good shows.

      I'm not exactly sure he missed the point. The central expression is "good shows". "Good" by what definition? Is he worried that humankind will not see the n+1st season of 24, x years from now? Or that he won't? I just fail to see the link between countable commercial success and some ill-defined, subjective definition of "quality" if applied to entertainment. Just look at what shallow, voyeuristic crap your general-prupose, mind-wasting TV program mostly consists of today. No imaginable change could make that much worse, in my opinion. But maybe someone can tell me why shows that have been designed with ~100% piracy in mind must under any and all circumstances be worse than those today?

      TV and movies are not like music, where the artists make most of their money outside of sales of the music

      How very shortsighted. Is this another law written into stone, not subjectable to change? An actor's public image is determined mainly by what role(s) he plays and what he says and does in public outside of movies, and not primarily by how much money his movies make. Of course, if an actor doesn't rake in cash with his movies, he won't play in many movies, but if NO movie makes box office money (assuming ~100% piracy), then the playing field is level again. Just think of how much money is made through merchandise. Of course, merchandising does by far not work for any movie, but as a matter of fact, the most succesful movies in term of box office nowadays are all movies with lots of merchandising potential (Star Wars, Matrix, LotR, Harry Potter, Spiderman, X-Men, etc. etc.). The actor can furthermore capitalize on his/her success in various other areas involving public appearance. Think of something, I'm getting tired of laying it down.

      Piracy fails the "what if everyone did it?" test.

      Examples like Apple's iTunes' success (and most TV consumers' laziness, btw) show that this scenario will remain what it is today: an industry scarecrow far from reality. There are (or could be) just so many more aspects to a movie or music CD than just retail price. If you can't compete on price alone, get ahead on other aspects. It's really simple, and does not even require a fundamental change of business model. This whole war of *AA vs. The World is nothing but the industry's struggle for a price monopoly irretrievably lost to file sharing. Now it's real competition, not just the pseudo-competition of Sony Music vs. Warner Records or Paramount vs. New Line Cinema.

      In conlusion: Don't paint the future so bleak, it's just not going to be as bad as you might think. Don't just take current trends and extrapolate them without boundaries, you will almost certainly overshoot. There are too many economic realities which will persist even in the remote future. To change them, a fundamental economic change would have to happen as well.

      --
      The grass is always greener on the other side of the light cone.
    55. Re:No one to root for by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's all about the law.

      Of your 5 points, only number 3 represents a likely violation of law.

      Linking to copyright-protected works is legal in Sweden. TPB hosts no copyright-infringing files on their servers. (Unlike Google, which actually caches copyright-infringing material on their own servers.)

      Like it or not, the law is the only thing that matters here.

    56. Re:No one to root for by aaribaud · · Score: 1

      Funny, that: I see no ad on their pages currently.

      But just to make sure, I visited the page on donating, and it states that donors get to have the ads removed--so, by all means if the ads annoy you, just donate: the ads will go aways and TPB won't profit from them any more. :)

      Also, I doubt that ads can sustain the costs of TPB. Numbers welcome, of course.

    57. Re:No one to root for by ticklemeozmo · · Score: 1

      Piracy fails the "what if everyone did it?" test.
      EVERYTHING fails the "What if everyone did it" test. Some with immediate problems, other with long term problems. This is why it's always essential to have a BALANCE. Zero piracy might mean distro channels have a monopoly and can change/charge/restrict whatever they want. Complete piracy might mean the end of good shows. The trick is to balance it.

      --
      When modding "Informative", please make sure it both has a source and IS actually informative.
    58. Re:No one to root for by linvir · · Score: 1
      You're completely ignoring my point. Most people pirating TV shows do so because that is currently the best way to get TV shows. The 'juicy gap' is to provide TV shows in an online format which is more convenient than bittorrent, and that's not hard at all. If you've been paying attention in the slightest, you already know that they're starting to do this anyway, and together with the blossoming of sale of shows over the internet, the creator of bittorrent himself is working on this very sort of thing as we speak.

      Your argument is nothing more than regurgitated MPAA propaganda. Though they know exactly what is going on with the market, and are adapting to it, in the meantime they must ensure that the pirates continue to look like the bad guys. Hence the 'piracy will kill good TV' idea. It's all part of the idea war. If people en masse were to realise that there other are factors involved in piracy beyond simply being a cheapskate, they might start to apply that logic to other areas.

    59. Re:No one to root for by acornboy · · Score: 1

      uhmm actually if your turn that around and apply the "what if everyone did it?" test to capitalism (the current neo-unfettered brand currently been promugated by the US and its suckup lackeys is an especially egregious example) you would find the world in a far more dire situation that the piracy model. Now that i think about it you seem to demonstrating the Stockholm syndrome in your defense of the MIAA and MPAA's rhetoric (i.e. over identification and sympathy with one's kidnappers)

    60. Re:No one to root for by kinkos · · Score: 1
      The biggest annoyance about this is that everyone is a bad guy who is involved in this:

      1) TPB sucks, because they're just leechers making money off of other people's copyrighted work, all the while disengenuously crowing about "freedom".

      I'm sorry, what? Last time i checked, they don't have advertising on their site. They even have a donation link to keep them going. Who's making the money? How are they acting counter to their own talk about "freedom" ?
      --
      Open Source, Open Mind
    61. Re:No one to root for by Mac+Degger · · Score: 1

      What the producers should have done the minute p2p was invented was sign MASSIVE deals with advertisers, embed those adds into the show and put them online themselves. Large revenue increase for a worldwide captive audience, offset by a slight loss on income selling the shows to foreign countries. The producers make money, the public get fast access to the show they want to see...everybody wins.

      The industry was too dumb to do this however, and look what's happened. We the People have arranged it so we get to see what we want to see anyway.

      The sneaky thing is that with productplacement so prominent nowadays, the producers already get huge amounts of money...but did we get less adds? Nope.

      --
      -- Waht? Tehr's a preveiw buottn?
    62. Re:No one to root for by Reality+Master+101 · · Score: 1
      Funny, that: I see no ad on their pages currently.

      Then you couldn't have looked too hard.

      Two banner ads: http://thepiratebay.org/browse.php

      Three banner ads + text ads (total of four): http://thepiratebay.org/brwsearch.php?b=1&c=102

      Clicking on random torrent (three banners, + text ad): http://thepiratebay.org/details.php?id=3490243

      But just to make sure, I visited the page on donating, and it states that donors get to have the ads removed--so, by all means if the ads annoy you, just donate: the ads will go aways and TPB won't profit from them any more. :)

      I don't care whether they do or not -- my point is that TPB has a lot of ads, and is clearly not a donation-run site.

      Also, I doubt that ads can sustain the costs of TPB. Numbers welcome, of course.

      What you 'doubt' comes out of your ass. My evidence is that a lot of sites make a LOT of money from banner ads. My evidence is that they had the money for a hundred servers and money to spare to get up and running again very quickly. Your evidence?

      What, is the idea that they might actually be MAKING A LOT OF MONEY all while wearing their freedom badge on their chest shock you?

      Welcome to the real world, boy.

      --
      Sometimes it's best to just let stupid people be stupid.
    63. Re:No one to root for by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Erm.. No, the big money *for the label* is in merchandise. Typically, a band sees .1-1% of the money from CDs, and more from the other stuff. They make more from tours, either by playing on tour (for, I would assume, 10k/night for a medium-popularity band) or by selling merchandise at the concert (where they are the middleman themselves; rather than selling the CDs for $5.00 to a company to distribute, they sell the CDs to customers for $19.00)

    64. Re:No one to root for by Lucky_Norseman · · Score: 1

      5) Slashdot sucks, because most people here don't see the immorality of file sharing, and don't see that incredibly expensive shows like 24 and Lost WON'T EXIST if they can't make money. We might actually be seeing the fall of good video programming. It may not exist in 10 years, except for amateur junk.

      Actually,
      here in Norway at least, Lost is a huge success precisely because of downloading. People had been downloading and seeing the first episodes so a huge wave of word-of-mouth preceeded the showing of the first episodes, making it an instant hit.

    65. Re:No one to root for by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      5) Slashdot sucks, because most people here don't see the immorality of file sharing, and don't see that incredibly expensive shows like 24 and Lost WON'T EXIST if they can't make money. We might actually be seeing the fall of good video programming. It may not exist in 10 years, except for amateur junk.
      The shows are profitable anyway, otherwise there would not be so many seasons. Advertising & broadcast licenses in lots of countries recovers all the production costs & assures profit.
    66. Re:No one to root for by aaribaud · · Score: 1

      *Numbers welcome*, said I, and you conveniently forgot to quote this, and to provide any sort of numbers. Can you sustain your statement with cold, hard, numbers? Or should we cast a doubt as to whose ass exactly the evidence comes out of?

    67. Re:No one to root for by Reality+Master+101 · · Score: 1
      *Numbers welcome*, said I, and you conveniently forgot to quote this, and to provide any sort of numbers. Can you sustain your statement with cold, hard, numbers? Or should we cast a doubt as to whose ass exactly the evidence comes out of?

      You said 'numbers welcome' as an irrelvent point, because you know I can't provide them, so you can claim some sort of 'victory'. Since neither of us know the numbers, we have to use other evidence.

      My evidence is that tons of web sites make money via banner ads, and we have nothing to assume that TPB would be any different. We also know that they had $100K-$200K (or more) to spend on servers.

      Since you're making the extraordinary claim that TPB would *not* make a lot of money from advertising, it's up to you to provide extraordinary evidence that they would be different from other sites. I've already proven my claim to the degree that it's possible. You haven't provided one shred of evidence for your claim, except to claim unilateral victory because we don't have their balance sheet.

      --
      Sometimes it's best to just let stupid people be stupid.
    68. Re:No one to root for by Xian97 · · Score: 1

      The same arguments were made 50 years ago when television began appearing in the majority of homes. After all, who in their right mind would pay to go watch a movie when you can get entertainment right in your own home for free? There wouldn't be any incentive for the studios to produce expensive movies since they would not be able to make a profit since people were watching television for free.

    69. Re:No one to root for by Xyrus · · Score: 1

      As "piracy" continues to increase, a wise studio would put in more product placement in their shows. A really wise studio would eliminate commericials all together, choose several products to advertise, and place them conveniently in the show.

      Before each season began, there would be sort of a show "draft". The advertisers, having previewed the show or knowing it's previous ratings, would place bids on shows to carry their product lines. The most popular shows would be able to demand the highest prices.

      After the draft, the show would work the products into the show. Cars, computers, under-arm deoderant, etc. are common enough items in real life that seeing them in a show really wouldn't be a shock. Now I'm not saying they should do "in-show" commercials (that would be very annoying), but how often do people drive, take a shower, do something recreational (like golf), have a beer, etc.

      It just seems to make sense. Then it wouldn't matter if th show were pirated or not, the advertisers would still know their products are reaching the populace.

      Then the only "sufferers" might be the cable companies, if they don't provide broadband.

      ~X~

      --
      ~X~
    70. Re:No one to root for by aaribaud · · Score: 1
      You said 'numbers welcome' as an irrelvent point, because you know I can't provide them

      I asked for hard numbers because I knew you couldn't provide them, granted. But that doesn't make my point irrelevant, quite the opposite in fact: it shows that you, as you so aptly introduced to formula, "pulled out of your ass" the idea that TPB balances their expenses with ads, although, from your own account, you know of no numbers. As you point out, neither do I; and I acknowledged this from the start. But I had sense enough to make a difference between my opinion and a fact, and you had not.

      Nuff said.

      BTW, I am not claiming, nor was I searching, victory; but thanks for recognizing that you were. :)
    71. Re:No one to root for by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      Indeed, and that works for music as well. I mostly download my music these days, and this is mostly because I want to be able to buy it online and then listen to it immediately. Since my musical tastes are not covered by IMS and the like, I have to resort to E2DK/BitTorrent/whatnot. Though lately websites such as allofmp3.com and mp3sugar.com (the latter is better for me as it caters more to the metalhead croud) are where I usually go first, and if they would go legal outside Russia with 10x the current price, it would still be a worthy deal in my eyes.

    72. Re:No one to root for by Darby · · Score: 1

      In a world where the content producers are at the mercy of the consumers with regards to whether or not the consumers elect to pay for the content,

      You misspelled "In a free market". HTH

    73. Re:No one to root for by jamarsa · · Score: 1
      Wow...you sure completely missed his point. Yes, they'll adapt their business models, to only produce those kind of shows that can make money even when widely pirated. His point is that this class of shows will include fewer, if any, good shows.

      Well, if it becomes then case, then everybody should say: "Nothing to see here. Move along", shut down and trash their TV receiver, and turn to more serious matters. I wouldn't see it as a 'Big Problem'...
    74. Re:No one to root for by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      24 sucks, if it goes bust then the market has spoken.

    75. Re:No one to root for by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      If no one watches the ads, there is no money to make shows.
      Do advertisers have tiny cameras in your eyes or something?
    76. Re:No one to root for by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The American economic system is based on the idea that people will pay for what they want. If content suffers to the point where people are unhappy about it then they will be willing to pay, in some form, to receive better content. That's the free market system that the U.S. supposedly subscribes to. Which is much better than the 'corporations donate to political campaigns in exchange for laws that favour them' system that it actually subscribes to.

    77. Re:No one to root for by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He said most people here obviously refering to Slashdot community, which isn't the majority of people.

    78. Re:No one to root for by Surt · · Score: 1

      No, they use statistics combined with the viewership numbers they get from a combination of the nielsen ratings and the more exact numbers that the cable companies provide based on what channel you're tuned into.

      They know that a certain percentage of people who watch the show without channel flipping will see the advertisement, they know (with cable) how many flip away from their ads, etc.

      When shows are distributed on p2p, the ads are typically stripped, so they can safely assume that statistically, the number of people watching the ads in that model is zero.

      --
      "Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking
    79. Re:No one to root for by ahodgson · · Score: 1

      There's barely any adapting to be done. People already download shows off the internet. All networks need to do is legitimize it and throw in some ads that aren't worth removing.

      Or just charge a reasonable amount for the download. I'd pay a couple of bucks an episode for a show I liked. I do now on DVD. I'd prefer to pay for it than have the show dependent on advertisers.

    80. Re:No one to root for by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      the wire. arrested development. spooks. the sopranoes. curb your enthusiasm. life on mars.

    81. Re:No one to root for by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      incredibly expensive shows like 24 and Lost WON'T EXIST if they can't make money

      Now now, you are making it sound as if it were a bad thing.

    82. Re:No one to root for by Thing+1 · · Score: 1
      Ah, but they don't have scales in the chairs to detect bathroom/kitchen breaks; they don't have cameras to detect when people have fallen asleep; they don't have microphones to detect when people hit MUTE on their TV (perhaps the cable remote could tell them, but there's a TV mute as well).

      They're going to need a lot more help from AT&T if they're going to see this through.

      --
      I feel fantastic, and I'm still alive.
    83. Re:No one to root for by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      that incredibly expensive shows like 24 and Lost WON'T EXIST if they can't make money.

      Dear sir, please tell me what I can do to accelerate this process.

    84. Re:No one to root for by TheGratefulNet · · Score: 1

      I hate to break it to you, the studios aren't making any money when people Tivo either.

      when 'the studios' have to live like real people, worry about their jobs going away to india, have to take crap jobs because the country no longer believes in its own citizens making a good wage - when the studios share in our pain, THEN I'll start to feel sorry for them.

      but as it stands, I don't think the studios are going poor. actors get WAY too much money, execs get WAY too much money and consumers get WAY too little rights.

      if a few studios went out of business - would I cry?

      NO! I'D PARTY, MAN! it would be a joyous occasion.

      the 'content' they deliver is already less than useless. let them fail. maybe it would be good for us all if that happened.

      (...there will still be books. and things online to keep you entertained and challenged. I can't remember the last time I was really entertained or challenged by stuff from 'the studios', to be honest.)

      we have kept the studios afloat at very high prices for too long. time for some equalization, I think.

      --

      --
      "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
    85. Re:No one to root for by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > expensive shows like 24 and Lost WON'T EXIST if they can't make money

      I'm downloading them right now so that they disappear as quickly as possible!

    86. Re:No one to root for by gowen · · Score: 1

      He's right, you know. Art can't exist without advertising revenue.

      That's why no great art was created prior to the invention of television.

      --
      Athletic Scholarships to universities make as much sense as academic scholarships to sports teams.
    87. Re:No one to root for by gowen · · Score: 1
      An actor's public image is determined mainly by what role(s) he plays and what he says and does in public outside of movies, and not primarily by how much money his movies make
      Movies aren't made to make money for actors. They're made to make money for film producers and financiers.
      --
      Athletic Scholarships to universities make as much sense as academic scholarships to sports teams.
    88. Re:No one to root for by l3v1 · · Score: 1

      24's season 5 is scheduled some time this fall on no less than two channels I receive

      Good for you. But there are many countries out there that have to wait years (and by that I mean year in plural form, with a value usually being bigger than 1) to see even the first episodes on tv, and sometimes with more than a year pause between the seasons.

      For such places torrenting their favourite shows is about the only way to see them before they celebrate their grandchildrens' birthdays.

      Yet, that doesn't mean they won't watch them on tv when they arrive finally. Hell, there are some series I'm watching repeatedly on tv when they are repeatedly aired, even if I already have some of them on dvd.

      If the shows were available online for a reasonable price tag, and not just for a certain country (i.e. abc online shows, itunes, etc.) most of this wouldn't happen. The torrenting of dozens of tv series episodes is probably a huge portion of the torrent-based traffic these days.

      --
      I am putting myself to the fullest possible use, which is all I can think that any conscious entity can ever hope to do.
    89. Re:No one to root for by Lord+Crc · · Score: 1

      How does filesharing substantially hurt 24 and Lost? The shows have already aired and made their money by the time they get onto filesharing sites.

      Here in Norway, tv shows usually lag behind with a season or more. However one station did something daring with Lost when it was about to premier, they spent a lot of money to get it very quickly, only a few eps behind. Since the show was such a hit in the beginning, a lot of people couldn't manage to wait and downloaded the eps from BT etc.

      Now if enough people had done this instead of watching it on tv, it's obvious that the tv station could not have afforded to buy the episodes so early. So they would probably have waited a season. Which means the owners of the series would have made less money off it.

      What you claim only holds true if the series is only aired on one network, and not sold to others. If it is sold, p2p has a very real chance of affecting revenues for that show.

    90. Re:No one to root for by NeutronCowboy · · Score: 1
      If it becomes the mainstream way of getting content, however, then it does make it uneconomical for the producers of content (except for news and for programs where the view interacts with the show, such as by voting on what contestants win or lose).

      Any data for that? Or are you just making it up?

      --
      Those who can, do. Those who can't, sue.
    91. Re:No one to root for by harlows_monkeys · · Score: 1
      Any data for that? Or are you just making it up?

      Try thinking about it.

    92. Re:No one to root for by init100 · · Score: 1

      They have a HUNDRED SERVERS and you think they're not making money? How naive you are.

      Even though around 130 servers were confiscated at the raid, The Pirate Bay had a lot less than that, more like 10-15. This is partly what the fuss is all about in Sweden, that the police took all servers at the web hosting facility, and not just those clearly labelled "The Pirate Bay", putting quite many unrelated companies and private web sites offline.

    93. Re:No one to root for by init100 · · Score: 1

      Nowadays, you watch the show for the commercials.

      Are you serious? Watching the same commercial over and over again, sometimes twice during the same commercial break, I find commercials really irritating. More often than not, I tape the shows and fast-forward past the commercials, even if I could technically watch them live. Better to e.g. read Slashdot while the show is running and watch it when it's finished.

    94. Re:No one to root for by init100 · · Score: 1

      I was under the impression that they gave access to their services for free.

      Some people count using banner ads to pay for the servers and network connections as "making money".

    95. Re:No one to root for by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you bothered to read the article, you would notice that the 100 servers belong to the ISP hosting TPB, not to TPB.
      But who am I to correct your cynic view of the world. Please go on...

    96. Re:No one to root for by Buran · · Score: 1

      the ads will go aways and TPB won't profit from them any more.

      Did it ever cross your mind that just maybe, there is no profit to be made here and the ads plus voluntary donations plus whatever the admins spend covers the hosting costs? Or are you one of those people who don't have any hobbies? You know, things that you enjoy doing that usually cost you money. Yes, it costs money out of pocket to have a hobby, but the tradeoff is the enjoyment.

      Some people like me enjoy reading or drawing or building models. We spend money on books, art supplies, and model kits. Some people enjoy running websites, and spend money on software, web hosting, tutorials, education, and such.

      Or had it not even crossed your mind that the notion that someone might be paying for this out of pocket might just be true?

    97. Re:No one to root for by aaribaud · · Score: 1
      Did it ever cross your mind that just maybe, there is no profit to be made here and the ads plus voluntary donations plus whatever the admins spend covers the hosting costs?
      Uhm, yes, it did cross my mind, as reading the post you were replying to should have shown you ("Also, I doubt that ads can sustain the costs of TPB.") . But maybe you meant to address Reality Master 101?
    98. Re:No one to root for by bulldogzerofive · · Score: 0

      Actually, TPB loses money on this venture. They actually believe in what they are doing.

    99. Re:No one to root for by Buran · · Score: 1

      But maybe you meant to address Reality Master 101?

      For what it costs to run and host a major site like that, it's a lot more likely that "reality 101" is that there is a cost involved. In the real world, some people really do host web sites as hobbies.

      But I've got an idea. Instead of arguing about this, because we can both argue this until the sun goes out, someone could, you know, ask them?

    100. Re:No one to root for by aaribaud · · Score: 1
      But I've got an idea. Instead of arguing about this, because we can both argue this until the sun goes out, someone could, you know, ask them?
      Actually, they do already answer in part: http://thepiratebay.org/donate.php says, quote starts, "Since we who work with the tracker have spent a lot of time, hardware and money out of our own pockets, donations are very appreciated. The donations are exclusivly spent on the tracker", quote ends. Granted, this does not imply that ad revenue is exclusively spent on the tracker as well. Stil, assuming greed would require to make hypotheses quite conflicting with their statement. Ergo, occam's razor says they don't profit.
    101. Re:No one to root for by wheany · · Score: 1

      A winner of a Swedish reality show donated a big sum of money to The Pirate Bay. They used that money to buy more servers last year.

  42. Well duh... by raehl · · Score: 4, Funny

    Software pirates don't have guns.

    This wouldn't have happened if those network admins were armed.

    1. Re:Well duh... by davecb · · Score: 1
      Goodness! We should supply them with belaying pins and rusty cutlasses...

      --dave

      --
      davecb@spamcop.net
  43. Re:Two political parties have alread filed complai by eff · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Major parties? ROTFL!

  44. One word by Ph33r+th3+g(O)at · · Score: 2, Funny

    honeypot

    --
    I too have felt the cold finger of injustice.
    1. Re:One word by Eudial · · Score: 4, Insightful
      honeypot


      Why would they set one up? I mean, bit torrent is completely open. Anyone can get your IP when you download off a torrent.
      --
      GAAH! MY PRINTER IS ON FIRE!!! PUT IT OUT! PUT IT OUT!
    2. Re:One word by Ph33r+th3+g(O)at · · Score: 1

      Server-based logs from a tracker under control of law enforcement would carry greater evidentiary weight in terms of reliability and chain of custody than IP addresses grabbed from a public torrent by a client.

      --
      I too have felt the cold finger of injustice.
    3. Re:One word by Eudial · · Score: 1
      Server-based logs from a tracker under control of law enforcement would carry greater evidentiary weight in terms of reliability and chain of custody than IP addresses grabbed from a public torrent by a client.


      To my knowing, atleast here in Sweden it's illegal for the police to trick people into comitting crimes. There is a better word for it, though it's lost to me at the moment.
      --
      GAAH! MY PRINTER IS ON FIRE!!! PUT IT OUT! PUT IT OUT!
    4. Re:One word by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      entrapment

    5. Re:One word by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wasn't that blackmail? Or was that only in a dumb movie with a buxom brunette and a creeking old fellow?

    6. Re:One word by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why would they set one up? I mean, bit torrent is completely open. Anyone can get your IP when you download off a torrent. so the MPAA is infringing on my property when it copies my IP onto it's logs?

    7. Re:One word by Ph33r+th3+g(O)at · · Score: 1

      Tricking criminals isn't entrapment, otherwise undercover drug and fencing enforcement would be impossible. Passively monitoring who downloads and logging that information isn't inducing someone to commit a crime they wouldn't have committed, and is permitted at least under U.S. law. I admit to an unfamiliary with Swedish law.

      --
      I too have felt the cold finger of injustice.
    8. Re:One word by Ph33r+th3+g(O)at · · Score: 1

      I don't know, but I remember that Demi Moore was smoking hot in it.

      --
      I too have felt the cold finger of injustice.
    9. Re:One word by init100 · · Score: 1

      and is permitted at least under U.S. law. I admit to an unfamiliary with Swedish law.

      In Sweden, there are two different types of entrapment (called "provokation", meaning provocation), "bevisprovokation" (rught translation "evidence provocation") which is legal, and "brottsprovokation" (rough translation "crime provocation") which is illegal. Evidence provocation is used to gather evidence from the suspect about previous crimes, while crime provocation would mean inciting the suspect to committing a new crime. The difference between them is to me somewhat unclear, but then IANAL.

  45. I'm guessing you meant Piratpartiet... by IANAAC · · Score: 2, Informative
    This exposure may get a lot of votes for Piratbyrån.

    Piratbyrån is a different organization (lobbying org.), albeit with similar goals.

  46. that's the main point... by zogger · · Score: 1

    ...right here "Most people also think that music piracy would go down significantly if a music CD had a resonable price."

    IF the music and movie industry were to realise that they could make more net profit with volume sales at a MUCH more reasonable price for relatively cheap to make plastic stamped discs hardly none of this piracy action would have occurred in the first place. It is ludicrous to charge 20 dollars for a cheap disk. Look at the cost of production/transportation/warehousing, etc of a VHS tape as compared to a stamped disc, yet they want similar money for them. So why is this again? It makes no sense whatsoever unless you use the word "gouging", which I realise is subjective, but still...

    If the entertainmnert industry wants to get this behind them, I suggest a few dollars *tops* for a stamped entertainment disc as the answer. It wouldn't completely eliminate so called "piracy", but they would see sales and net profits skyrocket. There is a simple fact of retail life here, people can see and react to gouging, and the entertainment industry just refuses to admit they are, in fact, serious chronic gougers. Their prices have NOT dropped and kept up with technological advances that make the reduced cost of duplication and distribution possible.

  47. Re:Two political parties have alread filed complai by linvir · · Score: 1
    According to my tertiary brain, Wikipedia:

    Vansterwhatever sounds like small fry, but FolkPartyYes is "the third largest party in the Swedish parliament and currently is in the opposition bloc", which makes it pretty fucking major. ROTFL!

  48. Re:Two political parties have alread filed complai by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In what way are Folkpartiet and Vänstern not major parties? They are the 3rd and 5th largest parties (out of 7) in parliament, and the second largest parties on the right and left respectivly.

  49. Not Victory... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... but "Mission Accomplished".

  50. YARRR! THERE BE BOOTY ABOUT! by shlevich · · Score: 1

    Congrats. to the Pirate Bay people. It's a happy day.

  51. Addendum by linvir · · Score: 1
    And yes, filesharing isn't ideal, but it exists for a reason. If the content creators were handling things properly on their end, providing things in the format people wanted, at a price they found acceptable, there would be much less piracy.

    With both sides being immoral, there's only one logical conclusion: humans aren't as good as we think we are. And hey, some people (you) get to feel superior to everyone else because of it. Bonus!

  52. Correction by DaveRexel · · Score: 1

    Like I said earlier, I'm taking part in the IRL demonstration in Stockholm so while walking aroung trying to keep the wifi up and I have to correct my post as this esteemed site does not allow editing.

    It was representatives from CENTERPARTIET (not Folkpartiet) who have filed a formal complaint.

    -apologies for any errors attributed to one-handed typing ;-)

    --
    # ~: no sigs today
  53. Makes you wonder... by DragonPup · · Score: 1

    ...TPB may be back, but ask yourself this: What US based organizations with a perchant of suing the bejesus out of people would love to see all the BT records for the US ip range?

    --
    "Useless organic meatbag" -HK-47
  54. Pirate Effect by stickytar · · Score: 3, Funny

    well it was online... till we slashdotted it.

    --
    believing the big bang requires a certain amount of supernatural faith
    1. Re:Pirate Effect by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In Soviet Russia, TPB slashdots you!

      Actually I don't think the slashdot effect would affect TPB, their capacity is quite high. Normally each server handles about 20000 requests/second and there are 14 servers (okok, not all are webservers). With the move to the Netherlands I've heard the number 8 mentioned, with more servers coming.

  55. Re:Two political parties have alread filed complai by DaveRexel · · Score: 1

    ... in the Swedish political system the smallest political parties play the role of "the tail that wags the dog", as Vänsterpartiet and Miljöpartiet do whenever they ally with Socialdemokraterna. This makes them and their policies major in my opinion.

    --
    # ~: no sigs today
  56. Re: Have you ever been to the USA? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I love how someone from a welfare state with oppressive tax rates (I'm sure you're okay with that because you'd leave if you weren't) criticizes the US when most likely he/she has formed his entire opinion based on slanted media presentation in the jealous of our prosperity EU.

  57. Police ressources by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My father in law was a firemen in Malmo and there are parts of the city where they, taxis and buses dont go in anymore because of unrest among the muslim population (and no country in the world has bent over more than the swedes to accomodate them) and that was his first response:
    "Sure, we get shot at trying to stop fires and they cant spare enough police to protect us but a site that links to questionable material is considered a priority"

    Of course, we shouldnt laugh.. during the first few terror color alerts when manpower was supposed to go to protect critical buildings, the feds always sent dozens of 'heroes' to bust medical marijuana patients...dying patients. Not enough agents to protect from imaginary threats but enough to spare to handcuff bedridden dying women....

    1. Re:Police ressources by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's the same here in Britain, the police seem to have unlimited time to harass people for flying British or English flags (may have happened with the Welsh and Scottish flags but haven't heard of it.. yet) because it "might offend minorities", or arrest 6 year olds for saying something "racist" or "homophobic" in a school playground, but "don't have the time" to look at CCTV tapes of burglaries taking place.

  58. ha by illuminatedwax · · Score: 1

    Nice PHP code.

    Warning: mysql_fetch_array(): supplied argument is not a valid MySQL result resource in /var/tracker/www/blog.php on line 98

    --
    Did you ever notice that *nix doesn't even cover Linux?
  59. Not working by Hemi+Rodner · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    I don't know about you, but I never managed to download anything from there. Before the raid the torrents never worked, even the newest ones. Now it can't even get me working .torrent files.

    --
    hemi
    1. Re:Not working by ozamosi · · Score: 1

      They get about 20 000 new connections/second. Yes, that is NEW ones. They already have a bunch.

      The linux kernel just can't handle that many incomming connections, so it breaks down. I heard that they used to reboot their servers every 7:th minute, just to get rid of the quene of connections Linux couldn't handle. Now, they've written some modifications to the kernel to make it more durable, but it still isn't enough: they can't handle every connection with the limited amount of servers they have. I heard they're replacing the whole IP-stack to improve their performance even more.

      The solution, for you, is to be patient. They may not respond to your request the first, second or even third time you ask them. But they will, eventually. Just wait.

    2. Re:Not working by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They get about 20 000 new connections/second. ...
      The linux kernel just can't handle that many incomming connections, so it breaks down.


        OMG! Has anyone told Google about this?

    3. Re:Not working by ozamosi · · Score: 1

      They probably know it already. That's probably one of the reasons why they keep lots and lots of servers that the connections are ballanced betwen.

  60. Legal threats by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What I'm looking forward to is a response on the "Legal Threats" page.

  61. Their search engine is still down... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It gives the error message "no hits due to politics." But it looks like just about all the torrents are still there and you can find them if you use another search engine and add: site:thepiratebay.org

    So just a minor inconvenience and they should have it running again soon if they got the site up this quickly :)

  62. I'm confused. by l0rdpestilence · · Score: 0

    Again I'd like to call on any slashdoters who are from our friends in the EU. To explain the subtleties why the Minister of Justice/ Police would have a hard time admiting to being wrong, and their by potentiall garnering good will and cut off the cult-like feal The Pirate party seems to be getting. Also does anyone close to the Pirate Party know why they don't move to HeavenCo?

  63. Your help is needed! by inerte · · Score: 4, Funny

    Quickly, citizens!

    The Pirates have gone global this time. They can change their port with the tidal waves of mind crimes and its nefarious actions.

    It's not time to save on resources. The criminals can move between countries in a matter of days.

    We need the help of a new super-hero spotted in Canada previous week! Only him can track down the Pirates and sunk their ship of infringments around the Earth.

    Support the fantasy! Don't let our dreams die!

    Captain Copyright, our prays are with you. Save us from the Pirates!

    1. Re:Your help is needed! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In other news ...

      The makers of the Internet website "Captain Copyright" were due in court today to begin preliminary hearings in the Marvel vs Cpt Copyright case. Marvel contends that Captain Copyright is a violation of their intellection property, stating "We were the first to put guys in leotards with their pants on underneath their y-fronts. Not only is the concept similar to a large aray of Marvel characters, it is severely hurting the profitability of our core product."

      Stan Lee was seen entering the court carrying a brief case and a mutilated doll made to resember Captain Copyright.

      More to come at 10.

    2. Re:Your help is needed! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey thanks you just pointed me to my new spray for halflife2!

    3. Re:Your help is needed! by louisv · · Score: 1

      Haha, the best part is from http://www.captaincopyright.ca/Ipnotice.aspx :

      "Permission is expressly granted to any person who wishes to place a link in his or her own website to www.accesscopyright.ca or any of its pages with the following exception: in order to protect the moral rights associated with this site, permission to link is explicitly withheld from any website the contents of which may, in the opinion of the Access Copyright, be damaging or cause harm to the reputation of Access Copyright. Specifically, permission to link is explicitly withheld from sites featuring pornographic, racist or homophobic content."

    4. Re:Your help is needed! by louisv · · Score: 1

      I'd like to add that since the comment sections of Slashdot regularly feature pornographic, racist, and homophobic content, Slashdot is most likely violating the moral rights of captaincopyright.ca.

      I'm sure a cease-and-desist letter will be forthcoming.

    5. Re:Your help is needed! by darkstar949 · · Score: 1

      Seems to me that this means that search engines are not permited to link to the website. Guess they don't want anyone to know about them.

  64. YAAAAAAAAARRRRRR - AVAST YE MATIES! by bizitch · · Score: 1

    Kick ass! - This has made my week!

    --
    ---- "Logoff! That cookie shit makes me nervous!" - A. Soprano
  65. Ha ha ha! by microbox · · Score: 1

    incredibly expensive shows like 24 and Lost WON'T EXIST if they can't make money.

    This is like saying that without the RIAA, there'd be no Michael Jackson or Madonna. Is that such a bad thing? Can't stop people making art, but the days of the $500gazillion blockbuster may be numbered, and perhaps that's not such a bad thing.

    --

    Like all pain, suffering is a signal that something isn't right
  66. Careful where you host by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    "The connection between PRQ and TPB? - Same owners, nothing more,"

    This should be a warning to find out more about your hosting company. Don't go with one associated with companies of questionable legality. (And being owned by the same company is not that distant a relationship)

  67. Police responsibility is a catch 22 in Sweden by the-intersocialist · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Swedish police has more leeway in Sweden then in the US because we don't have any institution to audit them. In american police (at least judging from police movies, correct me if I am wrong) it is considered improper for somebody to investigate themselves and therefore there are special police units that investigates on the actions of policemen. Here in Sweden it is the same polices doing internal investigation as all other investigation.

    Also when it comes to courts. In the US you have a right to be judged by your peers (in theory, atleast). In Sweden you have the right to be judged by your politicians - remember, those same people who apparently ordered the bust (which they had no right to do, as so many others have pointed out).

    The Swedish legal system is a catch 22 when it comes to govermental responsibility. The police carries out the orders from the politicians, the police investigates itself if anyone complains that their actions were illegal and if that investigation shows something was not right the politicians get to judge whether it was right or not of the police to carry out their orders.

    1. Re:Police responsibility is a catch 22 in Sweden by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Large police forces in the U.S. do have a separate department for performing investigations on alleged misconduct in the other departments. It's still imperfect because both groups may be equally corrupt, but it is certainly better than not having independent investigations because in many cases people have different biases. Sometimes peer juries can be a double-edged sword, too. People aren't particularly smart on average and are prone to making poor inferences. It's probably better than having politicians judge your guilt though, since in my experience politicians in the U.S. are up there with ambulance-chasers for sleaziness. They'd probably find you guilty just to obtain votes.

      The distribution and auditing of power is certainly a difficult problem. Our system is certainly not ideal, but fixing it within the framework of our government without making it more complex and less effective is beyond my imagining.

    2. Re:Police responsibility is a catch 22 in Sweden by kimvette · · Score: 1
      Swedish police has more leeway in Sweden then in the US because we don't have any institution to audit them.


      We used to; it is called the Federal Bureau of Investigation. The charter for that agency is to investigate government corruption, especially the executive branch of government, which includes the police and military. Unfortunately the laws and charter have been utterly ignored for many years and the FBI has become part of the executive branch and is itself often caught up in corrupt dealings, including spying on citizens and searching without warrants or probable cause.
      --
      The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
    3. Re:Police responsibility is a catch 22 in Sweden by number11 · · Score: 1

      In the US you have a right to be judged by your peers (in theory, atleast).

      That's a misconception that many USAns also have. The US constitution guarantees a right to trial by jury, but doesn't say anything about "peers". In any case, the meaning of the word "peers" isn't the same in Y2K USA as it was 800 years ago in England. That right was created by the Magna Carta, indeed an important document in the development of democracy (or at least, limits on the monarchy). It was written by noblemen who had a beef with the king, and "peers" are the English nobility. So what it actually means is, if you're a duke you get a jury made up of noblemen, not rabble.

  68. It's a huge victory. by babbling · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The MPAA, US government, and Swedish police took down the The Pirate Bay website. If I told you that was about to happen, you'd probably see it as a very bad thing for bittorrent file-sharers and Swedes.

    Instead, the action has been criticised in Sweden, gained the pirate party a lot more support and publicity, and the website has been put back up within about 2 days. Now it's hosted in other countries, and if any of those countries attempt to take it down, you can bet that it will again get widespread coverage in the news.

    The Pirate Bay has gone from being a website into an idea. The MPAA thought they could just take it down and that would be the end of it. Instead, it seems that any attempt to take it down just gets support for file sharers and causes copyright laws to be questioned. Other countries can take it down, too, but the Swedes have set an example - there will be political backlash every time someone tries to mess with The Pirate Bay.

    1. Re:It's a huge victory. by colganc · · Score: 1

      I haven't seen any mention that the US government took down TPB.

    2. Re:It's a huge victory. by putte_xvi · · Score: 1

      You haven't looked very hard then. Here's a video from the news where they talk about it: http://svt.se/svt/road/Classic/shared/mediacenter/ index.jsp?&d=52447&a=602092

    3. Re:It's a huge victory. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Pirate Bay has gone from being a website into an idea.

      And ideas, as we know, are bullet proof.

    4. Re:It's a huge victory. by xenobyte · · Score: 1

      It's out there in plain sight - just read MPAA's press announcement where they praise the raid and say that they worked closely with the US government and the Swedish government to make it happen.

      Sure it was Swedish police that executed the raid, but as there's no legal foundation for the raid (it was previously determined by the Swedish attorney general that TPB couldn't be shut down or procecuted through current laws), it came about through direct government pressure on the police, something which is highly illegal in most democratic countries and thus has caused two members of the Swedish parliament to impeach the minister of justice who did the pressuring. And one have to be exceptionally stupid to believe that the minister did it all on his own accord, especially after his paid-by-MPAA visit to MPAA just last month...

      --
      "For every complex problem, there is a solution that is simple, neat, and wrong." -- H.L. Mencken (1880-1956) --
  69. Pictures! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative
  70. Where is carnifex0 ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hello?? Echo.... ....

    1. Re:Where is carnifex0 ? by carnifex0 · · Score: 1

      Carnifex0 was giving his daughter a bath.

      Close, but still doesn't meet the criteria of "No recourse", since the article itself is posted by someone taking legal action to reverse the actions by the agency. (and the bad law that made the action possible)

      I don't doubt or dispute that bad things happen at the hands of some cops, but to make a blanket statement that indites all of Law Enforcements and paints them as jack-booted thugs by saying things like this happen "All the time" simply isn't fair or true.

    2. Re:Where is carnifex0 ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      You read about stories all the time in the US where someone for example gets their car seized as part of a raid, and before the owner can get the courts to force it back to them, it's already been sold at a government auction. In most of these cases the owner of the property was completely uninvolved, it could have been a car just parked at the curb in front of the house as the owner was happened to be visiting a friend across the street that day.

      Please provide a single corroborated instance of this occurring. I'll be the most surprised person on Earth if you can, but since you read about it 'all the time' it shouldn't be that much of a problem for you.
      Please point out where in your above original post, the words 'No Recourse' appear or are implied. The link posted seems to be a perfect fit to your request.
    3. Re:Where is carnifex0 ? by carnifex0 · · Score: 1

      Please point out where in your above original post, the words 'No Recourse' appear or are implied.

      Ummm. Ok.

      before the owner can get the courts to force it back to them, it's already been sold at a government auction


      Any other stupid requests? I do magic tricks, too.

    4. Re:Where is carnifex0 ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Idiot.

      (No, not the same AC)

  71. here's a link by TomasDK · · Score: 2, Informative

    http://tpbeng.blogspot.com/


    look for "The Pirate Bay to be spread over six countries":


    Pirate Bay goes up in six countries + conclusion Today,

    The Pirate Bay (TPB) informed us that the site will be back up tonight or tomorrow [June 2nd or 3rd]. They also said there will be four copies of the site in Holland, Russia, Ukraine and another country within the EU. This statement was delivered during an address of Rasmus Fleischer of Piratbyrån and a representative from The Pirate Bay (TPB) here at the Reboot conference in Copenhagen.

    1. Re:here's a link by octopus72 · · Score: 1

      Well, bad news for the MPAA and RIAA. Piratebay people obviously expected this and mantained backups to be able to deploy a new server elsewhere if needed.

      MPAA and RIAA might however try to shut down their domain name in USA, but then we would just head over to thepiratebay.ru :) Their trackers are also dependant on domain name, no?

  72. Hell Fucking Yeah by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Redundant

    Go Pirate Bay, but on a sidenote I need to get the fuck out of this country. (the US)

  73. Nice by Corbets · · Score: 1

    Same owners, nothing more,

    Yeah, cuz there's no reason why the cops would grab EVERYTHING belonging to someone when looking for evidence of a crime...

    1. Re:Nice by LocalH · · Score: 1

      They owned the company, not the servers. The customers own the servers, or at the very least the entirety of the data on them. This is like, if someone is selling drugs from a single apartment, then going around and searching every other resident at the same apartment complex - after all, they're all owned by the same people.

      --
      FC Closer
    2. Re:Nice by Corbets · · Score: 1

      Not quite the same, because their content was still on the servers. It's more like going through and checking every other apartment in the same complex to which the suspects had a key.

    3. Re:Nice by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In a colo facility like theirs, those other servers were the property of their respective companies. The colo company rents out rack space and bandwidth and leaves it up to the customer to handle hardware issues.

    4. Re:Nice by LocalH · · Score: 1

      And if the suspect is the apartment owner?

      --
      FC Closer
    5. Re:Nice by Corbets · · Score: 1

      Then life's a bitch for the renters, but shit happens.

  74. Their contact page. . . by kimvette · · Score: 1

    Doesn't work now. :( Hey guys, if you're reading this thread, here's what I wanted to say (well I'm expanding it a little more here on slashdot since the textarea is larger):

    Glad to see you back, keep up the good show. Can you use this rebuild as an opportunity to weed out unseeded torrents, or at least make it an option to filter them out?

    You've generated a lot of great press showing how corrupt the MPAA and our (I'm American) government are. Great work! I hope you guys win your upcoming legal battle. If courts actually enforced laws as written and intended, you wouldn't be in this mess to begin with, and here in America noncommercial trading would be a non-issue, but sadly our corrupt politicians keep extending copyright so it's effectively infinite and fair use is quickly disappearing. I'm glad you Europeans have a lot more common sense in that arena. Keep it up, and although we can't help you from here we are definitely rooting for you. The MPAA and RIAA still won't face the fact that "try before you buy" works even though Napster resulted in a huge spike in CD sales, and I'm sure that other P2P networks have helped to fuel the DVD sales explosion in recent years.

    --Kim

    P.S. I think it's high time you add to your "legal threats" page. It's great reading. :D

    --
    The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
  75. New rules by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    That's an erroneous request. You don't show what makes something legal, as it's presumed (in the US, etc) that your actions are legal until it's demonstrated that you have broken some law. So you don't request to be shown why something is legal, but instead why something isn't.

    Not now. That was in Former Democratic America.

  76. Pick better examples next time by __aailob1448 · · Score: 3, Funny

    24 and Lost won't exist? YES! YES! YESSSS!

    *Starts pirating in earnest*

  77. Re:Thank you, Sweden - Women over 40 are fine! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    For those of us males who are over 40, women over 40 are just fine!

  78. YEAH!!! Teach 'em some manners!!! GO PirateBay! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Fight for true freedom! Enough of american corporate crap; this fascist order must end.

    PirateBay, PiratePartiet, Piratbyran, you are not alone, this is only the beginning. It is the time to resist; the americans live a lie: Copyright was invented by them to END a monopoly (from herediraty english printer guilds), not to start new ones. Since the original intent to LIMIT this monopoly to 14 years is lost, lets fight for the abolition of these stupid laws. Down with IP! The majority wants it; corporations should not be placed before the people.

    And no, .torrent files do not contain "copyright" of those retards; the americans think they can impose their laws to the entire world, its their fault for letting absurd laws like the DMCA into effect in THEIR country. See what the inmigrants did, take the streets and seize power back from the corporations to the people, until then don't dare tell us you live in democracy because its not power for the people, its power for the corporations and that is nothing else but FASCISM.

    People of the world must oppose all "trade agreements" with the USA because they all force other countries to adopt laws how they see fit in Washington DC; which is nothing but the result of paid lobbies by the corporate rich elite. There is no such thing as a Democracy in there; "freedom of speech" (where are the pictures of killed soldiers in iraq) is not democracy. Americans understand and wake up; else don't blame the world just because your corporate owned TV brainwash you to make you believe the world out there is just full of jealously communist, terrorists, islamic, pirates wanting to "take your freedom"; what, you call that police state freedom? Give me a break, we are resisting YOU from takin OUR freedom.

    The World is not USA, we must not let them impose their views and laws into us.

    Full solidarity with alternative media and uncontrolled massive difussion of content without permission of the corporations.

    PirateBay: Once again you are resisting on behalf of the world, and teaching them a lesson.
    PiratePartiet: To legalize ALL non profit content copying is a worth cause; please attain victory so you can make those laws a reality!
    PirateByran: Keep up the ideological debate, don't let the fascists censor you!

  79. What exactly are we supporting here? by SilentChris · · Score: 1, Insightful

    When the news first broke that Pirate Bay was taken down, I commented "Good for them" on Slashdot. Immedate "flamebait" and "trolling" mods. I also got quite angry that people were so vehemently supporting them. I eventually got a temporary IP ban for my responses (Yeah, Slashdot! Way to block IPs if they get 5 or more 'Flamebait' mods in an hour. Glad to see I could ban just about anybody by modding them down enough).

    So, anyway, my question is this: why are we supporting them?

    The common response is this long and circuitous argument that Pirate Bay is somehow like Google, that links to copyright infringement aren't the same as direct copyright infringement, etc.

    Bear in mind this takes the same broken logic of copyright law (When is a copy a copy? When I have all the bits aligned perfectly? When I convert the AAC to an MP3? Etc...) and tries to stand it on its head. The whole bunch of laws are mired in inconsistency -- adding the "free information" take doesn't really add anything to the conversation and may make it worse.

    For some reason, no one wants to step back and look at the big picture. We, as nerds, dig into our one piece (digital copies) and ignore the rest.

    The bottom line is this: copyright infringement DOES cause serious problems. It causes money not to go to shows/movies/etc. It causes creative ventures to be cancelled. It causes people to lose jobs (not just the stars who have money -- people like the crew that have little).

    Yes, some people pirate to "try before they buy". Some use it to test software before buying it for a production environment. I'd venture to say the vast don't, however. Ask the average teenager/college student/etc. if he/she's REALLY going to buy that 3rd season of Family Guy/CD from Radiohead/V for Vendetta flick. Chances are they aren't.

    People say "pirated works aren't taking away money from anyone". I disagree. Way back when (for hundreds of years, actually) you had to buy items to find out if they were bad. And if they were really bad, tough. That was how the market worked. If that comedy recording from Vaudeville sucked, you didn't buy any more comedy recordings from Vaudeville.

    Nowadays you have tons of free ways to "sample before you buy":

    1.) Go to a store and watch the movie/listen to the CD.
    2.) Go to a friend's house and do the same thing.
    3.) Double-click a stream on the internet. Get a sample from iTunes, for example.
    4.) Listen to the radio (yes, SOME channel out there plays what you like).
    5.) Rent the item before buying it.

    With all those options available, pirating seems less and less of a legitimate option.

    Who's pirating? A lot of people. What are they pirating? A lot of stuff.

    Just because a lot of people do it doesn't make it legal, moral or right.

    1. Re:What exactly are we supporting here? by Tweekster · · Score: 1

      There is no "we". I will say it again, there is no "WE" so stop acting as if this site is a cohesive community with a single agenda.

      You dont support the pirate bay. guess what, no one cares.

      Many MANY MANY people do support them and obviously do care.

      Like you said, a lot of people are pirating a lot. You will not change their opinions, so please just go away.

      --
      The phrase "more better" is acceptable English. suck it grammar Nazis
    2. Re:What exactly are we supporting here? by Kojiro+Ganryu+Sasaki · · Score: 1

      A more important question is: Why would you NOT support them?

      If tv has reported the incident as what has actually happened then this is what happened
      1: The MPAA contacted Thomas Bodström about the pirate bay (he's the minister of justice, ironically)
      2: The minister commanded the police to raid the pirate bay (this goes directly against the swedish constitution because a minister is not permitted to "command" anything like he did)
      3: There was no crime commited according to swedish law
      4: Servers not related to the pirate bay were taken (an ISP lost their server, The Pirate Party lost their's)
      5: In a time were the police is constantly claiming that they don't have enough people to deal with more serious crimes, they can send FIFTY men on something like this.

    3. Re:What exactly are we supporting here? by Hackeron · · Score: 1

      > The bottom line is this: copyright infringement DOES cause serious problems. It causes money not to go to
      > shows/movies/etc. It causes creative ventures to be cancelled. It causes people to lose jobs (not just the stars
      > who have money -- people like the crew that have little).

      Copyright law causes an equal amount of problems and people are waking up - when the MPAA finally sees their business model is failing, they'll just have to come up with another. ISPs are coming up with a new business model because they aren't making money, restaurants are finding ways to combat fast food, and for the love of god please think of those making typewriters and coding assembly for the intel 8080 - those poor souls.

      > Yes, some people pirate to "try before they buy". Some use it to test software before buying it for a production
      > environment. I'd venture to say the vast don't, however. Ask the average teenager/college student/etc. if he/she's
      > REALLY going to buy that 3rd season of Family Guy/CD from Radiohead/V for Vendetta flick. Chances are they aren't.

      That's right - I don't want 14 CDs costing an extortionate amount to have The DaVinci Code audiobook and there's no way for me to download it legally without paying an equal amount while knowing the running/material costs are a tiny fraction that of selling CDs.

    4. Re:What exactly are we supporting here? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Right on.

    5. Re:What exactly are we supporting here? by Polarmind · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "Just because a lot of people do it doesn't make it legal, moral or right." When TPB went down in Sweden the traffic/internetload lessoned by 20%. TPB has 1.3 million (9 million citizens in sweden and one million of them are using torrents according to various reports) users daily. We are not thieves because the system says so, the system is wrong because WE say so! The people creates the system not the other way around. For a very interesting read: http://copyriot.blogspot.com/ (Quite long, but very fascinating)

    6. Re:What exactly are we supporting here? by 6ULDV8 · · Score: 2, Funny

      "Just because a lot of people do it doesn't make it legal, moral or right."

      Ummm... try telling that to any other group that has been harrassed by stupid laws. Why don't you start with homosexuals? 55's the limit.

      You must've been The Little Lemming That Could. Standing at the edge of the precipice while your friends were getting laid.

      --
      Pull my finger for my public key.
    7. Re:What exactly are we supporting here? by Suicide+Machine · · Score: 2, Insightful

      1.) Go to a store and watch the movie/listen to the CD."
      What about movies that are currently in the theatre and I want to know if it's worth paying the 25+ bucks to see it on the big screen (I always go with my roomate and girlfriend). I see movies all the time at movie theaters, or more aptly, theatre.

      "2.) Go to a friend's house and do the same thing."
      Ummm no. I have the amenities want at my house. Nor do I have many friends, as I'm a recent implant of Austin.

      "3.) Double-click a stream on the internet. Get a sample from iTunes, for example."
      30 secs in the middle of the song, chosen out of the best 30 secs mind you, does not a good representation make. Especially for any song over 2 minutes. I have a favorite band, they have music on iTunes. I listened to the previews, they were good so I decided to buy the CD. The CD sucked, and I couldn't get my money back.

      "4.) Listen to the radio (yes, SOME channel out there plays what you like)."
      Broadcast Radio does not play the songs I like. Now if your talking internet radio it normally takes (even the big guns in my genre) 4-6 weeks for them to get it in the stream, and I can only listen to internet radio streams a) when I'm online, b) when I'm not doing something else online, c) when I feel like it. Kinda hard to stream an mp3 stream to my car (I know I could pay upwards of $60+/month for a highspeed cell connection, but up yours if you expect me to do that.

      "5.) Rent the item before buying it."
      Tell me a place where you can rent a PC video game, an obscure industrial audio CD, or even a buy either one of them and return for my money back when I don't like it, I'll love you forever.

      "With all those options available, pirating seems less and less of a legitimate option."
      Actually it is looking like a more viable option.

      "Who's pirating? A lot of people. What are they pirating? A lot of stuff."
      Say the numbers on Slyck are correct and we'll add in another 10 million on BitTorrent/Other networks. This gives us 17.5 million people pirating. 17.5 million is alot. But that is what 5% of the total population of the US. The numbers, even at 100 million pirates, are satistically nil when dealing with the populations of the planet (potential 6.5 billion). Sure that's alot of people... you're right.

      "Just because a lot of people do it doesn't make it legal, moral or right.
      If a majority do it and put thier will to their representatives it _CAN_ be legal, morality is based on ethics which changes over time, and there is no such thing as "right".


      As for the story, I think that TPB needs to get servers going BACK IN .SE, else they (MPAA, RIAA, White House, WIPO) will consider it a win.

      -jijin

    8. Re:What exactly are we supporting here? by Surt · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The problem is, you're wrong with your bottom line:

      The bottom line is this: copyright infringement DOES cause serious problems. It causes money not to go to shows/movies/etc. It causes creative ventures to be cancelled. It causes people to lose jobs (not just the stars who have money -- people like the crew that have little).

      It's actually the copyright in the first place that causes the problems. It creates an unnecessary cartel of employment and jobs that hurts the rest of society. Art used to be about performance before the copyright cartel, and most of the works of art that people consider great were created under that system, not under the copyright system. Many of us believe, with well developed reasons, that the world would be better off without any copyright.

      Yes, some jobs will be impacted. Jobs that needn't have existed in the first place, and that are essentially leeches upon the rest of us, like most lawyers.

      Other jobs will be created, and in the balance, all of us will be better off.

      --
      "Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking
    9. Re:What exactly are we supporting here? by SilentChris · · Score: 1

      "Ummm... try telling that to any other group that has been harrassed by stupid laws. Why don't you start with homosexuals? 55's the limit."

      But that's precisely my point. These laws are created by lawmakers. In the US system, the lawmakers are elected by the majority. When these lawmakers do stupid shit (take bribes from major media companies, for example), it's the public's perogative to get them out. If not, that's the public's fault. Bottom line: the populace is ultimately responsible for stupid laws.

      Very rarely does deliberately ignoring laws actually work. What does work is voting the bastards out.

      "You must've been The Little Lemming That Could. Standing at the edge of the precipice while your friends were getting laid."

      Quite frankly, Slashdot as a whole contains a lot of lemmings. We all consider ourselves the "counterculture" -- the reality is we're just as interested in popularity among our peers.

    10. Re:What exactly are we supporting here? by SilentChris · · Score: 1

      You still haven't answered "why" people support them.

    11. Re:What exactly are we supporting here? by SilentChris · · Score: 1

      I asked "why support the Pirate Bay?" Everything you mentioned is a commentary on Swedish government and law, not the site itself. The boneheaded government, the MPAA, etc. is all ancillary to whether or not what the Pirate Bay does is right.

      Personally, I see the effects on friends in the software and entertainment industries. Slashdot posters can finagle the facts all they want -- piracy does have a measurable effect on keeping people employed in the US. As far as I'm concerned, that's much more important than people wanting to get stuff for free (the core issue here).

    12. Re:What exactly are we supporting here? by cheaphomemadeacid · · Score: 0, Insightful

      Just because a lot of people do it doesn't make it legal, moral or right.

      Am i really the only one seeing how this argument can easliy be turned against this? Just because alot of people sell a lot of crap doesn't make it moral or right :) I hope we're not stuck on the law==moral==ethical thing here?

    13. Re:What exactly are we supporting here? by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I am supporting them as an effective pressure group to bring copyright law back in line with the desires of the people. Personally, as a commie, I'd rather see copyright being abolished outright, but for something more realistic, the Pirate Party programme (5-year copyright term, noncommercial copying unrestricted) sounds just about right to me.

    14. Re:What exactly are we supporting here? by SilentChris · · Score: 1

      "What about movies that are currently in the theatre and I want to know if it's worth paying the 25+ bucks to see it on the big screen (I always go with my roomate and girlfriend). I see movies all the time at movie theaters, or more aptly, theatre."

      1.) Critic reviews.
      2.) Web previews (Yahoo Movies, official site, etc).
      3.) Television previews (HBO has these, like, way too much).

      "Ummm no. I have the amenities want at my house. Nor do I have many friends, as I'm a recent implant of Austin."

      Bravo for admitting you have few friends. Most do, however. Word of mouth is one of the best ways to discover stuff you'll like, because people tend to keep friends that share the same interests.

      "30 secs in the middle of the song, chosen out of the best 30 secs mind you, does not a good representation make. Especially for any song over 2 minutes. I have a favorite band, they have music on iTunes. I listened to the previews, they were good so I decided to buy the CD. The CD sucked, and I couldn't get my money back."

      First off, you can often listen to the entire song (streaming) on different services like Napster.

      As for buying a crappy CD, corry, but them's the breaks. Like I said, for hundreds of years this was the case.

      In a way it actually benefits you, as you're far less likely to contribute money to the band in the future. It also helps others, as the band is less likely to be funded and produce crappy music that they have to listen to.

      "Broadcast Radio does not play the songs I like. Now if your talking internet radio it normally takes (even the big guns in my genre) 4-6 weeks for them to get it in the stream, and I can only listen to internet radio streams a) when I'm online, b) when I'm not doing something else online, c) when I feel like it. Kinda hard to stream an mp3 stream to my car (I know I could pay upwards of $60+/month for a highspeed cell connection, but up yours if you expect me to do that."

      I've had this discussion with many friends with eclectic tastes. "Broadcast radio doesn't play what I like, Clearchannel owns everything, blah blah blah". I make them a wager: tell me a band you don't think gets any air time and I'll find you a channel that plays them. Sure enough, I ALWAYS find a channel in the area. It may be an obscure college radio station or something on AM, but I ALWAYS find one. I've made a ton of money on these bets.

      As for your "I'm not spending the money" spiel again, tough. Entertainment is costly (more because the stars demand such a premium. If you think it's too costly, you don't need to partake in it.

      "Tell me a place where you can rent a PC video game, an obscure industrial audio CD, or even a buy either one of them and return for my money back when I don't like it, I'll love you forever."

      Do a Google for "rent PC games", you'll find a ton of services. As for industrial audio, a lot of these smaller bands will send you out a promo CD if you ask, free of charge. They're just happy to get the music out there.

      "If a majority do it and put thier will to their representatives it _CAN_ be legal, morality is based on ethics which changes over time, and there is no such thing as "right". "

      I mentioned this in another reply. The people making these laws, in the US, are voted in by the majority. Whether they take bribes from the MPAA or not (and if they are they should be immediately voted down next election) the bottom line is WE'RE responsible for the laws. That includes copyright.

      That means, ultimately, the group responsible for the quagmire of copyright today is the us. Either a) enough people actually agree with these laws that they should stand or b) we should vote different people in next election.

      Ignorning or going directly against the law rarely works (and weakens the case). The best solution, if you want change, is to vote people in that can champion those changes for you.

    15. Re:What exactly are we supporting here? by Tweekster · · Score: 1

      I chose not to answer why.

      But simply, many people support them because those people feel there is no wrongdoing and they should not be punished.

      --
      The phrase "more better" is acceptable English. suck it grammar Nazis
    16. Re:What exactly are we supporting here? by SilentChris · · Score: 1

      While I think the copyright system is flawed, I think there are some fundamentals that are beneficial. Namely, copyright awards money to the people who are actually talented, and prevent others from leeching off them.

      Ever hear the phrase "starving artist"? It's not just a cliche. Some of the greatest art mankind has ever made was done by artists who couldn't even afford food or pay the rent.

      Biologically, we're born competitive. What copyright does is ensures the best, most creative minds actually get rewarded. Without copyright law, the "no-talents" would be paid the same as the "talents" (and it was this way for many years). Personally, I'd rather have the no talents die out.

    17. Re:What exactly are we supporting here? by SilentChris · · Score: 0, Troll

      Sounds like the "fingers in your ears, screaming LA-LA-LA" defense personally.

      To be honest, most of the people I've seen support them this way are teenagers our young adult males who simply don't (or can't, because they can't work a decent job) pay for what they're downloading. I used to be one of these -- then I got a job. It isn't really the media companies' fault that you can't get decent work (or that you have no skills and no one wants to pay you). *shrug*

    18. Re:What exactly are we supporting here? by Tweekster · · Score: 1

      And to be brief, no one cares what you think.
      A lot of people disagree with you, includng the Swedish parliment. I guess they have their fingers in their ear too.

      But that cant be, you hit the nail on the head, you are absolutely right with everything you said, now would you please go away happy someone said you were correct.

      --
      The phrase "more better" is acceptable English. suck it grammar Nazis
    19. Re:What exactly are we supporting here? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, why bother with laws, governments and treaties, when you just settle your grievance with force?

    20. Re:What exactly are we supporting here? by jaelle · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Well, no, some channel doesn't. I did not buy a single cd in the 15 or so years prior to my discovery of p2p. Not one. Because the music I heard sucked and too many cd's were full of bad songs. 15 bucks for a single song is just too much.

      Since p2p, I've been on a music buying spree. I'm finding music I love everywhere, download the entire cd, and then buy it direct from the artist. I like my audio uncompressed and in it's natural state, and most music lovers I know feel the same way. At first I bought from stores, until RIAA sued it's first kid. I immediately began boycotting RIAA affiliated stores and musicians.

      The music industry is not losing money on piracy. They're making more than ever. What they *are* losing is the musicians they've been treating as slaves all this time. If they'd treated fans and musicians decently from the start, this would never have been an issue.

      So that's the real-world result of 'piracy'. Musicians are actually getting my money for the first time since I was a teenager.

      --
      You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say will be misquoted, then used against you.
    21. Re:What exactly are we supporting here? by sh4na · · Score: 1

      Simply put: I'm in europe. I wanted to buy a season of a certain tv show that will probably never be aired in my country, or if it is, it'll be a few years. The DVD hasn't come out yet, but the show is available to buy from some online vendors, by episode. Just so you know, the shows that air in the us take a while to air in the rest of the world, due to the fact that they have to negotiate the sales, and the shows are pretty expensive to buy, especially by smaller countries which don't have the $$ that some big countries have. The shows are not sold on DVD until pretty much everyone has had a reasonable time to buy and air it first, which takes it's damn time, of course. Counting years here. So I wanted to buy this particular show, and went online to seek it. Found it, but couldn't buy it, why? Because I'm not in the US!

      So I want to have something that is available for sale, so I can do it legally, but apparently not because I'm not american. So US entities can pressure foreign countries to harass owners of search engines that make available things to people who cannot get them by any legal means, and we're the pirates? I say hurrah for TPB, and I won't be buying any DVDs anymore (I have an extensive collection of legally bought DVDs, stupid me) because that just gives the big hollywood companies and their cronies more money to do things like this. F**k them.

      --
      shana
      ......gone crazy, back soon, leave message
    22. Re:What exactly are we supporting here? by Mr2001 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Biologically, we're born competitive. What copyright does is ensures the best, most creative minds actually get rewarded.

      Er, no. What copyright does is shift the market from one where people get paid based on their talent and effort ("if you give me X dollars, I'll write or perform a song for you") to one where they get paid based on making copies ("if you want this information, you have to pay me for a disc containing it"). It infringes on the majority's freedom of speech ("sorry, you can't transmit that information without permission") just so a minority can treat their artistic talent as something that can be wrapped up in chunks and sold in jewel cases, rather than a skill that they actually apply in practice.

      --
      Visual IRC: Fast. Powerful. Free.
    23. Re:What exactly are we supporting here? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ditto to SilentChris and shame on all you scriptkiddies for modding him down.

      Copyright is not the source of all evil. It fosters creativity by ensuring that people will be compensated for their creations (or at least, that other people *won't* be compensated for taking other's creations and passing them off as their own).

      Right now, you kiddies aren't doing any real work. Once you enter the real world, you will realize that other people stealing the fruit of your labor (be it code, art, or credit for bagging the new account) sucks.

    24. Re:What exactly are we supporting here? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The recording industry is an unnecessary industry. Traditionally they made their money from distribution. They did not make money by making music, the artists did that. They used to make money by recording music, but the cost of making a quality recording has dropped to the point where any locally successful indie band can afford to do it. So all that was left was distribution. They put content on CDs and shipped them to our communities, and we payed them for that service.

      But now we have a better way. Now, the cost of distribution is effectively zero, so what are we paying recording companies for anyway? Absolutely nothing. Or worse, we're paying them to limit the variety of content by choosing a few artists from among millions and promoting the hell out of them. They are taking our money and giving us no useful product or service in return.

      So why do I support the pirate bay? Because they are helping to get rid of an unnecessary industry that is sucking up resources while serving no useful purpose.

    25. Re:What exactly are we supporting here? by nathanh · · Score: 1
      So, anyway, my question is this: why are we supporting them?

      Because regardless of your personal opinion on piracy - mine is that software/music piracy is illegal, immoral and unethical - there are problems with the way this was handled. A minister gave direct orders to police which is illegal in itself. Police resources were taken away from investigating actual crimes to perform an illegal raid to seize computers for torrent sharing which is not illegal in this particular country. Several innocent bystanders were illegally forced to give saliva samples for DNA testing and were illegally denied legal representation. And the thing that started all this was pressure from the US government and an association that represents US corporations, but I repeat myself, and that itself is illegal, immoral and unethical.

      What has happened here is yet another example of US corporate interests trumping the local laws of another country and foreign governments being used as puppets to enforce US laws in countries where US law does not apply. There is far more at stake here than some torrents being shared on a server in Sweden.

    26. Re:What exactly are we supporting here? by Suicide+Machine · · Score: 1

      First, I think alot of what Piratbyran has to say are good things that need changed. Oh and every 4 years I write myself in for president, because I am the only one who can who has my best intrests at heart. All the rest of the time I vote for Libertarian, and if they are not available in the said position, I vote for Democrats. Actually, I have over 600 studio pressed DVDs, about 20 odd VHS, and over 100gigs worth of MP3s.. Some of that are pirated.. but I'd say less then 10% of all my media is pirated. As for what I actually do in real life when it comes to pirating/purchasing is this: 1) For smaller bands, I download the music, then send them money, normally $10 by postal mail, international mail if nessecessary. I have three of those air mail envelopes now on my dresser waiting for me to goto the post office for stamps. Thosee also have a note saying thanks for the music, and asking if there is a better way to make sure they get my money with my email address for a reply. 2) For big, signed bands, I'll download it and the purchase the CD used if I really like it, new. 3) Software/Games, let's say if I like it I'll buy it normally the next day. There's two exceptions to that though, WinXP and Office. Only so I can convert any of the propritary office formats into RTF or HTML to use on my Mac or SuSE box. 4) Movies. I buy movies constantly. In fact I buy movies when I'm out not even with a movie on my mind, I go out for say cat food and I'll end up with like 2 movies and cat food. However, and this is an important however, I will only buy a movie I like and have seen before, reviews are not a good way to get to know a movie, spoilers etc etc. Hell I don't even like watching previews because I'm disappointed most of the time. I now hear about movies off the top 100 list from TPB, using diffrenet search criteria. 5) I do not pay for cable, and I don't want too. But the only show I pirate is House from Fox. I spend plenty of money on entertainment, but I choose exactly who I give my money to. As for the crappy CD, it shouldn't be like that, you should be able to agree with me. Thanks for the idea to rent PC games, I've honestly never looked into. BTW, I have other reasons for not having very many friends. Namely I'm a Asperger-having, paranoid hermit, and I like it that way.

    27. Re:What exactly are we supporting here? by chord.wav · · Score: 1

      >When is a copy a copy?
      This reminds me of this famous letter. I know is long for the average /.er attention span but it's worth it.

      http://www.chillingeffects.org/resource.cgi?Resour ceID=31

      Letter to Warner Brothers: A Night in Casablanca
      Groucho Marx

      Abstract: While preparing to film a movie entitled A Night in Casablanca, the Marx brothers received a letter from Warner Bros. threatening legal action if they did not change the film's title. Warner Bros. deemed the film's title too similar to their own Casablanca, released almost five years earlier in 1942, with Humphrey Bogart and Ingrid Bergman. In response Groucho Marx dispatched the following letter to the studio's legal department:

      Dear Warner Brothers,

      Apparently there is more than one way of conquering a city and holding it as your own. For example, up to the time that we contemplated making this picture, I had no idea that the city of Casablanca belonged exclusively to Warner Brothers. However, it was only a few days after our announcement appeared that we received your long, ominous legal document warning us not to use the name Casablanca.

      It seems that in 1471, Ferdinand Balboa Warner, your great-great-grandfather, while looking for a shortcut to the city of Burbank, had stumbled on the shores of Africa and, raising his alpenstock (which he later turned in for a hundred shares of common), named it Casablanca.

      I just don't understand your attitude. Even if you plan on releasing your picture, I am sure that the average movie fan could learn in time to distinguish between Ingrid Bergman and Harpo. I don't know whether I could, but I certainly would like to try.

      You claim that you own Casablanca and that no one else can use that name without permission. What about "Warner Brothers"? Do you own that too? You probably have the right to use the name Warner, but what about the name Brothers? Professionally, we were brothers long before you were. We were touring the sticks as the Marx Brothers when Vitaphone was still a gleam in the inventor's eye, and even before there had been other brothers--the Smith Brothers; the Brothers Karamazov; Dan Brothers, an outfielder with Detroit; and "Brother, Can You Spare a Dime?" (This was originally "Brothers, Can You Spare a Dime?" but this was spreading a dime pretty thin, so they threw out one brother, gave all the money to the other one, and whittled it down to "Brother, Can You Spare a Dime?")

      Now Jack, how about you? Do you maintain that yours is an original name? Well it's not. It was used long before you were born. Offhand, I can think of two Jacks--Jack of "Jack and the Beanstalk," and Jack the Ripper, who cut quite a figure in his day.

      As for you, Harry, you probably sign your checks sure in the belief that you are the first Harry of all time and that all other Harrys are impostors. I can think of two Harrys that preceded you. There was Lighthouse Harry of Revolutionary fame and a Harry Appelbaum who lived on the corner of 93rd Street and Lexington Avenue. Unfortunately, Appelbaum wasn't too well-known. The last I heard of him, he was selling neckties at Weber and Heilbroner.

      Now about the Burbank studio. I believe this is what you brothers call your place. Old man Burbank is gone. Perhaps you remember him. He was a great man in a garden. His wife often said Luther had ten green thumbs. What a witty woman she must have been! Burbank was the wizard who crossed all those fruits and vegetables until he had the poor plants in such confused and jittery condition that they could never decide whether to enter the dining room on the meat platter or the dessert dish.

      This is pure conjecture, of course, but who knows--perhaps Burbank's survivors aren't too happy with the fact that a plant that grinds out pictures on a quota settled in their town, appropriated Burbank's name and uses it as a front for their films. It is even possible t

    28. Re:What exactly are we supporting here? by Ash-Fox · · Score: 1

      > Once you enter the real world, you will realize that other people stealing the fruit of your labor (be it code, art, or credit for bagging the new account) sucks.

      It's copyright infringement, not stealing.

      If I steal someone's car, they won't have it anymore.

      If I steal music from a store, they won't have the CDs/DRM licenses or whatever I took.

      I don't advocate copyright infringement, just please use the proper terms. :)

      --
      Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
    29. Re:What exactly are we supporting here? by thePowerOfGrayskull · · Score: 1

      ...than they are of the fact that your studio emerged "Casablanca" or even "Gold Diggers of 1931."

      Wow! I didn't know that they had Gentoo back then! And you could emerge movies?!

    30. Re:What exactly are we supporting here? by thePowerOfGrayskull · · Score: 1

      And the thing that started all this was pressure from the US government and an association that represents US corporations,

      Eh? I'm confused. I thought that the US government is the association that represents US corporations.

    31. Re:What exactly are we supporting here? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Copyright is not the source of all evil. It fosters creativity by ensuring that people will be compensated for their creations (or at least, that other people *won't* be compensated for taking other's creations and passing them off as their own).

      And also, what you've described here is plagiarism and fraud, not copyright infringement. We've had laws against fraud much longer than we've had laws against artificial-state-granted-monopoly infringement. So you could say ...fraud is illegaler.

    32. Re:What exactly are we supporting here? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      From Merriam-Webster:
      Piracy: 3 : the unauthorized use of another's production, invention, or conception especially in infringement of a copyright.

      Stealing: 1 : to take the property of another wrongfully and especially as an habitual or regular practice.
      1 a : to take or appropriate without right or leave and with intent to keep or make use of wrongfully
      b : to take away by force or unjust means
      c : to take surreptitiously or without permission

      (© 2005-2006 Merriam-Webster, Incorporated)

      Those words sure describe "copy right infringement." But I expect you will have to reply to this comment in order to justify your immoral actions and help you remove any guilty feelings....

    33. Re:What exactly are we supporting here? by SilentChris · · Score: 1

      If everyone were to copyright infringe, the creator would get $0. They would at least get something if people paid.

      Therefore, at some level, it IS stealing. It's stealing the time, effort, etc. of the creator. If the creator says "you can't have my creation unless you pay for it", but you have it anyway without paying, it's stealing.

    34. Re:What exactly are we supporting here? by nathanh · · Score: 1
      Eh? I'm confused. I thought that the US government is the association that represents US corporations.

      I already did that joke.

      nathanh said "... from the US government and an association that represents US corporations, but I repeat myself"
    35. Re:What exactly are we supporting here? by AudioEfex · · Score: 1

      It's not what we're supporting, it's what we aren't.

      I refuse to fund the disgusting, bloated, exploitive industry that has grown up around recording artists. They promised us over 20 years ago that CD's would eventually go down in price, they were just expensive because they were "new"; CD prices have done nothing but go up.

      Call me immoral for listining to a song if it makes you feel better, but it's no skin off of my back. I simply refuse to pay for the limo that the executive is chauffered around in, or the 50 million dollar bonuses of executives when the artists recieve virtually nothing.

      I'd have no problem buying individual songs off of something like iTunes, but I refuse to buy a crippled product that forces me to use one piece of overpriced hardware to listen to my music.

      So I download. Send the fuzz after me. Mod me a troll, mod me flamebait, LOL. When these corporations start providing a product at a decent price and stop exploiting their artists and their customers, I'll reconsider my position. Until then, a song is an intangible object and the tired, fallacy of an argument that they are losing money isn't going to change my mind. I just wouldn't listen to it otherwise, but if I can, for free, I'm going to.

      And there is some honesty for you.

      AE

    36. Re:What exactly are we supporting here? by aug24 · · Score: 1

      Tell me *eactly* how I can get the money back for that 3rd series of 24/Lost/Family Guy back when I've opened the packed, watched half of it and discovered it sucks?

      Tell me how I can subscribe to (say) 24 (I'm in the UK) without having to buy all the rest of Sky?

      Tell me how I, as a citizen of the world, get to choose how and why I pay for TV entertainment without being forced to pay for a lot of dross too?

      No. We need a new way. P2P will replace broadcast. The **AAs of the world simply need to work out how their new business model will work.

      Justin.

      --
      You're only jealous cos the little penguins are talking to me.
    37. Re:What exactly are we supporting here? by init100 · · Score: 1

      Either a) enough people actually agree with these laws that they should stand or b) we should vote different people in next election.

      Many people think that these laws suck, but since they think that other issues are more important, they accept the bad laws so they can vote for the guys with the right politics in the important fields.

    38. Re:What exactly are we supporting here? by thePowerOfGrayskull · · Score: 1

      /me shrugs. So get someone to mod me redundant... I didn't see yours.

    39. Re:What exactly are we supporting here? by nathanh · · Score: 1
      I didn't see yours.

      You quoted mine! You just left off the punchline. :-)

    40. Re:What exactly are we supporting here? by Ash-Fox · · Score: 1

      > But I expect you will have to reply to this comment in order to justify your immoral actions and help you remove any guilty feelings....

      I don't condone piracy. But since you sed the word 'immoral', I must assume you're one of those crazy religious people, who think that a person's morals are defined in a book.

      --
      Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
    41. Re:What exactly are we supporting here? by Ash-Fox · · Score: 1

      > Therefore, at some level, it IS stealing. It's stealing the time, effort, etc. of the creator. If the creator says "you can't have my creation unless you pay for it", but you have it anyway without paying, it's stealing.

      I thought we paid to get manufactored copies, theft of service is quite different.

      Note: I'm not a pirate, I'm just tired of this 'slang' being thrown around in the media.

      --
      Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
    42. Re:What exactly are we supporting here? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, I think *you* missed the point. The copyright laws are supposed to let the publishers, producers and artists make some money while balancing that with the public's desire for new materials. The current copyright laws fail miserably, establishing a new perpetual monopoly for copyright holders.

      If people are copying the titles and passing them around its not a moral issue, its a failure of our legislators to balance the public's interest against the inducements by **AA lobbyists. Moral outrage is misplaced when taking back what is rightfully yours from the thief who stole it from you.

      Is the current approach ridiculous? Of course. So is the effort by the **AA to create a perpetual monopoly with the sanction of our government. When our laws are ridiculous, why are you suprised that the public reaction to our laws is equally ridiculous?

    43. Re:What exactly are we supporting here? by thePowerOfGrayskull · · Score: 1

      Oh, my. I feel silly.

    44. Re:What exactly are we supporting here? by trozman · · Score: 1

      Just because a lot of people do it doesn't make it legal, moral or right.

      Sometimes I say "we should have a law against eating." Then people yell at me, after all, EVERYONE eats. But I always tell them, "[insert your phrase here]"

      In essence, you've answered your own question. Different people believe in different rights and morals. In fact, as many posters have mentioned, TPB isn't even illegal in Sweden. So, if someone supports the PirateBay because it is in fact legal, AND he/she believes it is moral and right, then your judgment holds no value insofar as you (according to that person) is legally and morally WRONG.

      Ah, how ironic when one bite oneself in the behind, eh?

  80. Thank you, Sweden! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    As an immoral and greedy little fuck, I am glad to still have a place to freeload on games, music, movies, etc.

    Go get those EVIL companies who force me at gun point to want and download all their their stuff. I wouldn't have bought the stuff anyways, that is why I download and amass it FOR FREE! I will be sitting here comming up with excuses and rationalizing for my immoral behavor while you do the dirty work and GO GET 'EM.

  81. Did someone say Superzero? by Xenographic · · Score: 1

    You should remember to call him a "superzero" -- you can't call him a "Super-hero" [TM] because Marvel & DC jointly own the trademark on that! You'd think they'd want to *avoid* infringing a little more carefully...

    In the mean time, I'm still having lots of fun linking to things that set off their stupid security system (all it requires is a ? in the URL), and Google-bombing those propaganda whores :]

    1. Re:Did someone say Superzero? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      You should remember to call him a "superzero" -- you can't call him a "Super-hero" [TM] because Marvel & DC jointly own the trademark on that!

      The correct term is not "superzero", but "underwear pervert".

    2. Re:Did someone say Superzero? by wheany · · Score: 1

      Well, it seems that "superhero" (or its variants) is not used anywhere on that site.

  82. I think it was in Cryptonomicon... by bgfay · · Score: 2, Interesting

    ...that someone had set up a powerful magnet system in the door to the servers so that if they were removed, the drives were turned to soup. Someone here is bound to know if such a thing would work, would do any good, or is even possible. I was just curious.

    --
    Yeah, I'm as old as my UID would suggest.
    1. Re:I think it was in Cryptonomicon... by Bromskloss · · Score: 1
      ...that someone had set up a powerful magnet system in the door to the servers so that if they were removed, the drives were turned to soup. Someone here is bound to know if such a thing would work, would do any good, or is even possible. I was just curious.
      I would suggest the following: Unplugging the computer (without doing the appropriate voodoo tricks in advance), a self destructing sequence is initiated (by special hardware, or mabye software running on the main processor), which overwrites all data on the harddrives. An internal battery would power the procedure when the servers are on their way to the police. :-)

      I will make myself one, that's for sure.
      --
      Swedish plasma phys. PhD student; MSc EE; knows maths, programming, electronics; finance interest; seeks opportunities
    2. Re:I think it was in Cryptonomicon... by geo.georgi · · Score: 1

      No, that's how the real hackers do that http://youtube.com/watch?v=Vxi6NeMGiwU

    3. Re:I think it was in Cryptonomicon... by vyrus128 · · Score: 1

      I'd go with thermite myself... more reliable than magnetic erasure or programmatic wipe. Of course you could just trigger a nuke of the site from orbit. It's the only way to be sure.

    4. Re:I think it was in Cryptonomicon... by Magnus+Reftel · · Score: 1
      I think it was in Cryptonomicon...
      It was, on page 721.
      --
      print "Yet another p{erl,ython} hacker\n",
    5. Re:I think it was in Cryptonomicon... by Alphi1 · · Score: 1
      I would suggest the following: Unplugging the computer (without doing the appropriate voodoo tricks in advance), a self destructing sequence is initiated (by special hardware, or mabye software running on the main processor), which overwrites all data on the harddrives. An internal battery would power the procedure when the servers are on their way to the police. :-) I will make myself one, that's for sure.

      That's all well and good, until your first power outage and/or UPS failure.

    6. Re:I think it was in Cryptonomicon... by Anonymous+Cowled · · Score: 1

      Unfortunately, this won't work as an external magnetic field cannot penetrate the metallic shielding - if an external magnetic field is applied to a closed conducting body, it doesn't matter how close to the shielding it gets, the field inside the body will have zero effect from the external source.

      Sorry, but I can't be bothered to google for a better explanation / diagrams, etc...

  83. The tape recorder spells DOOM!!! by eddy · · Score: 1

    > incredibly expensive shows like 24 and Lost WON'T EXIST if they can't make money.

    But incredibly expensive shows like those didn't even exist back when the home video was making an appearence, and then too the media conglamorates said the same thing (but then it was about the movies).

    Well, okay. So in a way they were right. TV is killing the movies -- at least quality wise -- but not because of home recording.

    --
    Belief is the currency of delusion.
    1. Re:The tape recorder spells DOOM!!! by eddy · · Score: 1

      What I mean by that is, we only got those good expensive shows AFTER copyright infringement increased (via the internet). So by using Hollywood Fuzzy Logic, we got the shows BECAUSE of warez! Wohoo!!

      --
      Belief is the currency of delusion.
  84. Think of the damage done! by Opportunist · · Score: 1

    When the execs raided those server rooms, stealing (legally, because of the warrant) the servers of innocent bystanders (i.e. companies hosted there), how much damage was done that single day by the ??AAs? How many businesses lost a fortune? How many went bankrupt? How many people lost their jobs because of a half-assed witchhunt?

    I blame this for a dramatic, irresponsible and irrevocable blow to commerce and trade, and I think organisations like the ??AAs should be outlawed right now, because of the damage they cause in their overzealous, almost religious, attempt at hunting down witches where there are none.

    Better now than later!

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  85. Trust by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How can we trust the pirate bay now? (if you ever did).
    Would you continue to use a r00ted box?

  86. PB by certel · · Score: 1

    This is interesting because when a raid happens, aren't the owners of the sites typically taken too? How did the site get reestablished?

  87. Newnova and TPB by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    WEll so far all I get for torrents on TPB is: 404 File not Found.

    And Newnova.org is not working either.

    As The Hurricane says: What up wit that?

  88. Media Reaction by DarkBlackFox · · Score: 1

    It's interesting to see how the Swedish media reacts to all the happenings compared to how American media would react if something like that happened here. It seems the Swedish media is capable of fair and balanced reporting on the facts without any apparent political spin or control. I could easily see American media portraying the takedown of a filesharing network as a win against terrorists/child porn/drugs, and as a strictly positive thing with a 'government knows best' slant.

    1. Re:Media Reaction by Suddenly_Dead · · Score: 1

      American news makes far more sense if you watch it as though it was a comedy.

      At least, this is how it seems to me as a Canadian. We get Fox News, CNN, MSNBC, and a few local news broadcasts from our satellite TV provider.

  89. You are not considering all aspects of sharing by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

    Sharing can be good for TV as we know it, too. Let's say you miss a few episodes of a show and then heard from someone else it's good. You can download past episodes, and if you like it start watching and spread word of mouth yourself. This happened to me for American Inventor, I had not heard about it until a few shows were past but after watching the back episodes I proceeded to watch it every week on real TV - with ads.

    Sharing is a way for a show that got shafted with a bad timeslot but it otherwise good to find a new purchase on life. What if TV filesharing had been more popular back when Firefly was being produced?

    Movies are somewhat different, since many movies you wouldn't want to watch more than once - but even there you can argue early sharing may drive people into the theaters through word of mouth.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  90. The Pirate Bay Bust Video Clip by Junior+Samples · · Score: 1

    I found this torrent on the resurected Pirate Bay Site:

    The Pirate Bay Bust video converted to divx.avi format - http://www.thepiratebay.org/details.php?id=3492068

    I got a 404 message when I tried to download it. The site may not be fully available. I'll try again later.

    1. Re:The Pirate Bay Bust Video Clip by Junior+Samples · · Score: 1

      It's working now. I just grabbed the torrent.

  91. you're insane... by YesIAmAScript · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Used books is similar to duping data?

    Not at all. Only one person has the book at one time. Not so with bittorrenting.

    As to 24 and such TV shows, there are more and more people stealing these shows daily. Those people are unlikely to watch it first run, they are viewing it off the internet, with no ads.

    That's lost revenue.

    As to whether the companies could be smarter, that's not for you to decide. Why not walk into the GM headquarters and explain "you're not selling your stuff in the right way, I'm gonna start stealing cars off your assembly lines and selling them the ways I see fit".

    See how that goes over.

    This is a ridiculous reverse justification for theft.

    If you don't think the company is doing a good job, then don't patronize them. But don't steal their stuff either. Just like you would with an object you cannot copy, like a car.

    --
    http://lkml.org/lkml/2005/8/20/95
    1. Re:you're insane... by sh4na · · Score: 1

      Actually, it *is* for him to decide. We're the targets of the company, the audience, so out views and actions should be a pointer to what they're doing wrong. I've posted previously about this, and I'll say it again: I am not allowed to watch a show nor buy it for years to come because I'm not in the US, I have no choice but to torrent it. The company that makes the show does not realize that there's a huge audience out there outside the US that would buy their shows if they would give them a chance; instead they don't let us buy it until they can make a sale to foreing countries' stations for them to air it, which takes years and is very expensive, so not all shows are aired in all countries until years after they're aired in the US. With an increasingly connected world, why would I just wait for someone to decide to air something if I can just download it? Why are some people allowed to watch them and other's are not? Oh, it's legal for some to watch or buy them, but not for others? Because I happen to live in another country?

      You say that people don't watch the shows aired live, 'cause they prefer to download them? That's dumb, of course they would rather watch them than wait for the download! But your argument shows that you don't realize that many people downloading *cannot watch those shows any other way*!

      And that argument about theft, really, that's so screwed up it's ridiculous. A theft is when one is *deprived* of their property by another. Are the studios deprived of their properties when I download? No. Do the studios consider the money they wouldn't be getting from me to be their property? Now that's laughable, but that's their (and your) argument.

      When more than 50% of society downloads things, will you criminalize half of society? Is everyone a criminal? Or is that a sign that something is seriously wrong with the model?

      --
      shana
      ......gone crazy, back soon, leave message
    2. Re:you're insane... by xigxag · · Score: 1

      Used books is similar to duping data?

      Not at all. Only one person has the book at one time. Not so with bittorrenting.


      You're giving a kneejerk strawman reply to a point not in contention. No-one said that used books were similar to duping data. My criticism was a reply to the specific principle that making money off of others' copyrighted material without their permission is bad.

      If you want to give a different reason why you think TPB is bad --that it facilitates unlimited reproduction of copyrighted material -- well, whatever, but leave me out of that one.

      As to 24 and such TV shows, there are more and more people stealing these shows daily. Those people are unlikely to watch it first run.

      What's your basis for that evaluation? I could just as easily see the opposite taking place. Here's a hypothetical, made-up situation. A friend of mine keeps crowing about what a great show Veronica Mars is. But I always forget to come home in time to watch it. So one day I say, WTH, let me download it. Hey, turns out the show is pretty good. Next time, I want to see it first-run, so I make sure to stay home on Tuesday night. Had I not been able to check it out through, BT, I would never have watched it to begin with.

      As to whether the companies could be smarter, that's not for you to decide. Why not walk into the GM headquarters and explain "you're not selling your stuff in the right way, I'm gonna start stealing cars off your assembly lines and selling them the ways I see fit".

      GM's actually a good example of how slow-witted corporations can lose out by not listening to their customers. Thanks for pointing that out. ;) Anyway, regardless of whether you or MPAA or Viacom or whomever personally approves of TPB, it is the case that filesharing is taking place. And will continue to take place, regardless of whether or not TPB stays up. Regardless of what is up to me to decide. So they can either react to reality, and thrive, as has Apple, e.g., or they can keep their heads in the sand and suffer, as the record labels did before iTunes.

      If you don't think the company is doing a good job, then don't patronize them. But don't steal their stuff either. Just like you would with an object you cannot copy, like a car.

      If you've never Xeroxed a page out of a book, or recorded a song off the radio, then you're not a hypocrite. "Oh, but that's legal. That's fair use." Perhaps it is, now. But over the objection of copyright holders. So, no, I don't buy into your idea that the MPAA and its cohorts get to solely decide what's permissible and what's impermissible, what's legal and what's illegal with respect to so-called IP. Particularly in countries, like Sweden, where BT sites are legal.

      --
      There are two kinds of people: 1) those who start arrays with one and 1) those who start them with zero.
    3. Re:you're insane... by Surt · · Score: 1

      But don't steal their stuff either. Just like you would with an object you cannot copy, like a car.

      You don't want to make that comparison, because it's not far off in the future where we'll be able to copy cars using assemblers. People are already creating amazing stuff using 3d laser sculpting machines.

      And when the time comes, I think most people will feel just about equally fine with copying a friend's car as they do about copying a friend's music.

      --
      "Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking
    4. Re:you're insane... by RedBear · · Score: 1

      As to whether the companies could be smarter, that's not for you to decide. Why not walk into the GM headquarters and explain "you're not selling your stuff in the right way, I'm gonna start stealing cars off your assembly lines and selling them the ways I see fit".

      See how that goes over.

      This is a ridiculous reverse justification for theft.


      You just made the same mistake as the poster you're replying to, comparing the theft of a physical object to copying some data.

      Hypothetical question for you (with the qualifier that like the vast majority of filesharers you will be doing this only for personal use, not to sell or otherwise make money with it):

      If you had a replicator device capable of taking two tons of dirt and turning it into an exact molecule-for-molecule copy of a Lamborghini Countach for a total cost to you of two dollars, would you use this device or take the "moral high road" and pay some company half a million dollars for a "legal" copy of the car? Would you support throwing people in jail for replicating a car design for personal use? Would you whine that the car manufacturer will be put out of business because several hundred million people who never could have afforded the buy the car legally are making their own copies of it? Or would you tell the car manufacturer, "Hey, the world is changing, better find a new business model or go into another business if you can't adapt"?

      Think about it. Things are not always black and white, and the world is constantly evolving. Something has to adapt. Filesharing will never stop, it will just keep getting easier. So either you'll have to make us all into criminals or adapt the business models, because you sure as hell aren't going to talk millions of people who mostly can't afford 1/100th of this stuff into stopping what they're doing just because you feel like they should be paying out the nose for any copyrighted content.

  92. Re:Server logs? Bad Fruit... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    this raid appears to have been illegal... if the tree is bad... then every fruit from that tree is worthless...

    well, that's how it used to work in pre-amerikkka, anyway...

    now, i'm not so sure...

    "legal" apparently has been redefined as whatever "the decider" decides at any given moment.

  93. bit of backround explanation on the events by koroviev+(begemot) · · Score: 0

    As you may have gathered from previous posts, similar activities are going on in Bulgaria and Romania who are soon to join the EU. Before they join the EU, though, the EU have asked from both countries to do something about corruption, and that includes enforcing copyright laws. In Bulgaria you could, until recently, buy pirated CD on the street (but thats only because few people have broadband, i.e. BitTorrent). The final decision was to be made on 16 May, and was posponed until October, so that buggs can be ironed out. The Bulgarian government has argued that EU countries (such as Poland) have higher corruption indexes. The EU has argued that this may be true, but its not as blatant as in Bulgaria, the differece being that open/blatant corruption (such as Ferraris parked on sidewalks, and car bombings) leads to a general social and economical pesimism i.e. blatant corruption is much worse than hidden corruption regardeless of the actuall numbers, as it hinders enterprise and economic growth. The BG government has argued that there is blatant corruption in the EU as well (but this is just speculation on my side, unlike the above events and exchanges that are public) - ThePirateBay does not keep a very low profile, and indeed their e-mails section doesnt help. So, to avoid being perceived as an institution (the EU) that is hypocritical or keeps double standards - TPB has had to be raided - the Swedes bought it. Sorry, folks :(

  94. cramped seats by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How fat are you?

  95. Re:Two political parties have alread filed complai by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    According to Wikipedia, Folkpartiet(which, according to the correction by the OP did not file a complaint) was third largest in the latest election with 13.39%, Vänsterpartiet fifth with 8.39%, and Centerpartiet(which, according to the correction by the OP did file a complaint) sixth with 6.19%. Note that the second most popular party in the last election had only 15.26%. Scandinavian politics are not like U.S. politics; while parties of this size (5%-15%) are obviously unable to get a majority of the vote or anything like it, they do wield significant political power by entering into coalitions with other parties. Vänsterpartiet is not "small fry".

  96. You're doing it wrong. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They're not always worse quality. You can find uncompressed, unencrypted DVD images if you look in the right places, and without the commercials or things lecturing you on how "downloading movies is wrong".

  97. MPAA shouldnt've gloated. TPB will never go away. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Another example of their ignorance about tech culture.

    Geeks are some of the most stubborn, proud people in the world. I've yet to find a geek who, when faced with an initial setback, said "Ok. I give up". By definition, such a person would not be a geek.

    And if you give a geek a setback, and then try and publicly humiliate said geek, you have created somebody who may do everything, up to and including dedicating his life, to proving you wrong. The quality of life for a geek is inconsequential when he has a point to prove.

    MPAA needs to take their victories in a small fashion, silently, and gracefully, if they don't wish to make the situation worse for themselves.

  98. slyck.com reports that takedown was a hoax by Lazy+Jones · · Score: 1

    read: slyck.com

    --
    "I love my job, but I hate talking to people like you" (Freddie Mercury)
    1. Re:slyck.com reports that takedown was a hoax by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wrong year, pal.

    2. Re:slyck.com reports that takedown was a hoax by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Check the date, June 2, 2005.

    3. Re:slyck.com reports that takedown was a hoax by Suicide+Machine · · Score: 2, Informative

      ThePirateBay Releases Version 2.0
      June 2, 2005

      Ummm Last I check it's 2006..

      Oh yea then there's also this.

    4. Re:slyck.com reports that takedown was a hoax by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When you are grown up you can read the red ink in the headline... the INQ is pointing out that a year ago to the day the Pirate Bay faked its own death

  99. Value of off site backups by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Next time you get asked about off site backup you can use this as an example of why you are best to have a copy.

  100. Interesting indeed. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    I am also very curious about what the polls will show in the upcoming weeks/months. I do expect the number for the Pirate Party in the official polls to be lower than it actually is though. I believe the polls are still performed using land-line phones and I also suspect that a fairly considerable part of the target demographic for the Pirate Party use mobile phones exclusively.

    This is the case with me, for example. This event has pushed me over the edge and I intend to vote for them. But, since I only have a mobile phone there is no possibility that I'll show up in the polls.

  101. my political rhryme for the day by 80+85+83+83+89+33 · · Score: 1

    whoever ordered the raid should be tried and hung in the hague.

    --
    i disable sigs
  102. Not possible unfortunately by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 1

    Harddrives are reasonably well shielded against magnetic fields. I mean the last thing you want is your HD losing data because you happened to set a refrigerator magnet near it. They also have some pretty powerful magnets of their own inside. So you would need an overwhelmingly powerful magnet in your door to accomplish what you want, espically since you have to remember magnetic attraction, like so much else, desceases with exponentioally distance. So the little magnets on the HD heads are trememnously power with respsct to the platters because they are right over top of them (like less than a human hair away).

    If you did have a magnet strong enough to achieve this, it would grab anything magnetic from quite a distance, such as the case of a computer, and stick it to the doorframe with grat force as happens with an MRI you get too close to.

    Cool bit of sci-fi plot, but not something you could do in reality.

  103. Re:Two political parties have alread filed ... by aliquis · · Score: 1

    Folkpartiet? One guy from Centerpartiet did it first, and then Vänsterpartiet. I'm not sure if you said the wrong one or if three partys have done it.

  104. ABC is already offering lost online for free! by merreborn · · Score: 1

    "incredibly expensive shows like 24 and Lost WON'T EXIST if they can't make money."

    http://dynamic.abc.go.com/streaming/landing

    5 episodes available!

    Seems ABC's already adapted to our digital world.

  105. Tor. by Ruff_ilb · · Score: 1

    Just route your tracker requests through Tor + Privoxy. There's no way anyone's going to catch you from behind that. When I need extreme privacy, that's what I do.

    --
    http://www.TheGamerNation.com/Forums
    1. Re:Tor. by Frenchman113 · · Score: 1

      That is considered rude, as the Tor network can't handle that kind of traffic. Moreover, if you do that you will:

      a) have terrible down/up speeds
      b) probably get banned from Tor

    2. Re:Tor. by Ruff_ilb · · Score: 1

      Not ALL of the traffic. Just the tracker requests, which afaik, aren't that much traffic (one refresh every couple of minutes, tops?)

      --
      http://www.TheGamerNation.com/Forums
  106. Distributor by Mark_MF-WN · · Score: 1

    Isn't the city and/or state of New York suing a number of gun distributors for essentially that reason? There's some extra nonsense about the fact that the distributors weren't able to read the minds of their customers and determine how they intended to use the guns that they were buying.

  107. Add one more thing by aliquis · · Score: 1

    I might add that Centerpartiet the last one or two years seems to have been most piracy friendly (and maybe more like freedom of speak and such even thought I can't remember the different occurencies I'm thinking about) of the partys not counting Piratpartiet which I suspect not many will actually vote for anyway.

  108. Gasp! by Mark_MF-WN · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Gasp! Are you saying that American law isn't the supreme law of the world? Handed down by god himself to the puritans, so that they might convince the entire world of the immorality of nipples, pot, and sharing?

  109. Christ on a crutch! by Octopus · · Score: 1

    I went to the PB blog and got this:

    Warning: mysql_fetch_array(): supplied argument is not a valid MySQL result resource in /var/tracker/www/blog.php on line 98

    THE AUTHORITIES CONFISCATED ALL OF THEIR @ SYMBOLS! CORRUPTION!

  110. Sounds like BS by aliquis · · Score: 1

    TPB traffic beeing 50% of the swedish Internet traffic? I call bullshit. What about other GOOD torrent sites? FTP sites? DC? The traffic of whatever backbone node went down like 20% or so when TPB was down, I expect some of the traffic on that one is foreign however so that value can't be trusted, but on the other side shouldn't even more of the traffic from countries except sweden be even more full of torrent traffic?

    Also I don't even know WHERE to turn to get 1gbps and it sounds like totally bullshit if you don't score some special deal and I guess you could do that in any country.
    Some people can get 100mbps, but Bredbandsbolaget which use to deliver most high bandwidth Internet connections only delivers 100/10 now (at the same price as they did with 10/10 earlier so it's still cheap.)
    Most people got crappy xDSL like 24/1, 8/1 and so on thought.

    Our Internet connections aren't as good as they could have been if the government didn't screwed it up, fiber to everyone >>> xDSL.

  111. Makers by Mark_MF-WN · · Score: 1

    People DO periodically go after gun manufacturers nand gun distributors, including governments. That's not to say that that's a reasonable course of action (isn't it then, by extension, the government's own fault for allowing the manufacture and sale of guns? Why don't they sue themselves?), but it's entirely inline with the way people in positions of authority behave.

  112. BZZT! Wrong! by Mark_MF-WN · · Score: 1

    Read a newspaper some time. The united states is holding thousands of people without charge right now, who are assumed guilty until proven innocent (not that they are ever given a chance to prove themselves innocent). Police routinely kill people who aren't resisting arrest. Millions of people go to jail without trials, simply because their lawyers don't want to waste time that could be better spent with clients that can actually afford to pay them.

    1. Re:BZZT! Wrong! by edflyerssn007 · · Score: 1

      citation of which newspapers? thanks.

      --
      So you see what had happened was....
  113. you're still insane by YesIAmAScript · · Score: 2, Funny

    I never said I never broke copyright law. But I don't kid myself about it when I do it. Sometimes I'm doing it for the right reasons, sometimes I'm not. But I don't lie to myself about it.

    You made the argument about being similar to used bookstores to bolster your argument. It is useless as an argument, because of the reasons I point out. If used bookstores duplicated books and sold them, then it'd be a useful argument, they would indeed be similar.

    Your hypothetical situation does indeed arise. I know people who have gotten back episodes that way and then began to watch the show. However, regardless of whether it helps the company or not, it's illegal, it's stealing their content. If the company is smart enough to allow you to view back episodes to get caught up, that's great. If the company doesn't do it, it isn't up to you to change their business model.

    It is their right to hold on to their stuff so tight that they lose gobs of money. You don't get to remold their goals because you think you know better, even when actually you do know better.

    Again, just like a non-duplicatable object, if you don't like how they sell it, you are free not to buy it. You aren't free to rip it off.

    --
    http://lkml.org/lkml/2005/8/20/95
    1. Re:you're still insane by Thing+1 · · Score: 1
      Okay, how about this one: are you upset that my library (1) rents compact discs, and (2) has a pay-per-hour computer with a CD burner and convenient $0.25 blank CDs?

      All this screaming about "ripping people off" only serves to clue the people in to how they're being ripped off. $20 CDs after being told that after a few years the cost of the new factories would be paid and the price would be lowered; copyright being retroactively extended so that authors who made a contract with the public that their works would enter the public domain at a specific point years after they wrote their works, are able to break that contract and reap the rewards of breaking it while receiving none of the penalties that a contract breaker generally gets (although it's not really spelled out in the contract what happens when the producer breaks their end of the bargain, since it was inconceivable to the country's founders that producers would have the incentive or the ability to break the contract by usurping the government).

      Yeah, it's a fair balance all right. Excuse me while I vomit.

      And don't tell me physical items can't be copied; they already can, just with less precision and greater expense. In the future they will be able to be copied with exact presicion, for almost no expense.

      Will you then pull the "angry man yells at cloud" stance and say the people in Africa should be starving, that copying food for them is taking money away from farmers?

      --
      I feel fantastic, and I'm still alive.
  114. Server Room Camouflage by Sloppy · · Score: 1
    who the fuck needs to wear camo on a raid of a server room anyway?
    I want to see clothing intended to be used as camoflage in server rooms. I can just imagine a dude walking around with rails on his sides, 19 inches apart.

    So many product ideas, so little time and capital.

    --
    As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
  115. They should call it : "The police AT bay"! by Newer+Guy · · Score: 1

    LOL!

  116. AAAAAHH! My eyes! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Those bold passages are a different font on every line. Can you please only link to PDFs by people who have been trained in the responsible use of fonts?

  117. alternate theory by Deadplant · · Score: 1

    Here's some wild speculation for your amusement. (i have not even rtfa)
    It has been suggested that the U.S. pressured them to do this right?
    They seized all the servers in the secure hosting area of this ISP...
    Perhaps TPB was not the most important target. It could be a cover for an intelligence gathering raid.

  118. Coburg, OR? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Cool! You live in Coburg, Oregon. I'm just a few miles away.

    For anyone who doesn't drive frequently on US Interstate 5 through the Willamette Valley, the small town of Coburg recently annexed a couple ponds and maybe a truck stop on the other side of the freeway from the rest of town for the express purpose of generating speeding ticket revenue. The stretch of road in question isn't very long, is perfectly straight, and has historically been the source of fewer than average wrecks than the rest of I-5. A couple years ago Coburg was operating the same speed trap without having annexed that part of the freeway, and the state legislature stepped in and passed a law that allowed Coburg to keep pulling people over for speeding, but mandated that any traffic fines would go to the county, not the city police responsible for the traffic stop. Thus Coburg decided to annex the freeway.

    So what's this got to do with the Pirate Bay?

    Well, in the spirit of Slashdot's excellent and enlightening analogies: the Pirate Bay is like someone speeding on I-5, the freeway is Finland or Mexico or whatever country the Pirate Bay was operating in, and Coburg is the United States. So from this analogy it's clear that once Denmark, or whatever country is I-5, tells the United States it can't do whatever it wants in their country anymore, then Coburg is going to annex France (or wherever the TPB is -- you can bet we've got the CIA and Dick Cheney dictating this location right now). The only really meaningful difference between the two scenarios is that we'll call it "liberating" rather than annexing. So consider yourselves warned!

    By the way, there's plenty of historical precedent for that. This wouldn't be the first time we've liberated France, so you know we mean it!

  119. What a let-down by Jafafa+Hots · · Score: 1
    This shows that those swedish police are truly incompetent! That was no raid, that was a disinterested tour group!

    Where's the battering ram taking down the door? Where are the flash-bang grenades? Instead we got a group of very slow moving, bored guys shuffling about aimlessly, looking like they haven't got a clue, once in a while jotting something down or taking a photo, smiling at their friends, but mostly looking like my grandma would at the server racks.

    --
    This space available.
  120. Shit or Shut the fuck up by fufubag · · Score: 1
    HEY! Everyone crying like little babies about the U.S.A. just stuff it! If you don't like it, try and get laws changed, try and get your lazy fucking friends to vote for a new party, try something besides sounding like a bunch of 3rd graders who've had their play time taken away.


    The U.S. gov't isn't the only bad apple in this orchard. Governments of all countries have agendas. They have people working in them that want to help their country and they have those who are following personal agendas as well as possibly global conspiracy agendas. Repeat: ALL COUNTRIES HAVE THIS. Stop acting like your country is so much better.


    The U.S.A.: Its a work in progress, either help out, or SHUT THE FUCK UP!

    1. Re:Shit or Shut the fuck up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      trying to save the US in its current state is like trying to save a big mac from the toilet the day after you ate it.

    2. Re:Shit or Shut the fuck up by fufubag · · Score: 1
      I know, I know, but we have to remember, there are a bunch of other turds clogging up the toilet along with us. At least we can try and use it as fertilizer or something.

      I can't say if people who post anti-u.s. stuff aren't doing anything to help, but it is frustrating to see all the posts. I mean, for those of us who live here, complaining on slashdot isn't going to change/stop all the corrupt politicians. We need to call our representatives (if you get a big enough group of people contacting their rep's - things can change - remember, the poly's want to stay in office, so they have to do what the majority wants) and vote for new ones if that is what it takes (and not just vote, but work to get ALL the people in your district to vote - or to agree with your views).

    3. Re:Shit or Shut the fuck up by witte · · Score: 1

      When the US govt and/or the **AA's are leaning on other countries with enough pressure to influence the way they enforce justice to the point that they *break their own laws*, I think the citizens of those countries have a right to bitch about that.
      I'm sure you wouldn't exactly be cheering with joy if Sweden pushed American law enforcement agencies to arrest American citizens for something that is not illegal in the USA.

      > The U.S.A.: Its a work in progress, either help out, or SHUT THE FUCK UP!

      Is this another way of stating that we are either with you or against you ? How silly.
      Also, please remind me how foreigners can influence US policy ?

      > try something besides sounding like a bunch of 3rd graders

      Thanks for the hint.

    4. Re:Shit or Shut the fuck up by fufubag · · Score: 1
      When the US govt and/or the **AA's are leaning on other countries with enough pressure to influence the way they enforce justice to the point that they *break their own laws*, I think the citizens of those countries have a right to bitch about that.

      I never said they don't have the right. I think I stated clearly that it just doesn't do much good (on here). If I was in that position, I would be greatly disappointed that my country gave in to such pressure, and I would want to have words with my fellow citizens and representatives (if I lived in a country with such civil rights as to have government representation) and try and get things changed.

      Sure, telling the world what you think about the evil U.S. is within your rights (at least it is in the U.S.!), but it doesn't help much except making you feel better about yourself.

      Also, please remind me how foreigners can influence US policy ?

      I guess most courntries have foreign relations with the U.S. right? You can talk to your government about their policies and the way they deal with the U.S. govt.

    5. Re:Shit or Shut the fuck up by fufubag · · Score: 1

      It would be great if our government reps read slashdot and could see how unhappy many of us are about certain issues. The fact is, most of them probably do not. We need to actually contact our rep's, (which we can by phone or email) in the U.S. Also we would probably need to get multiple people organized and 'of one voice' to get our rep's to really pay attention to us. Yes, it takes some work, but it can be done. It happened with womens rights, civil rights, and probably some other examples that we can all think of.

    6. Re:Shit or Shut the fuck up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sure, using the foreign relations. You mean like when most of europe was against the latest invasion? You have to be fair, there is no way the US government listens to anyone besides the corporations funding it (the politicians). But I'm not going to go into specifics. And I agree with you that of course everybody needs to help out with improving the country, but it's hard when demonstrators are labelled terrorists and treated like animals (note that free speach in the US is ok, as long as it is the "right" speach, remember the celebrities demonstrating the gulf war?). You have to realize that things need to change on both sides, talking about the problem does not help, if there is no one listening. Don't let your feelings cloud your judgement.

    7. Re:Shit or Shut the fuck up by witte · · Score: 1

      I really hope writing your rep will help out, but I'm afraid the problem with that is that power has been consolidated with a small group of interdependent powermongers that reside in ivory-tower-city. (Washington, Brussels,... you name it.)

      They care more about staying in power and scratching each others back and helping out any organisation or lobby that is willing to fund their election campaign, instead of catering to the will of the people that pay taxes for them to take their responsibility and do their job and maintain and improve democratic governement.

      I support that organisations/companies/[generic entities] have their rights within a democracy, but sometimes things get way out of hand because of too much power being concentrated with the kind of people that get a hardon from milking the masses for their own gain, by whatever means and damn the consequences.

      Small / independent US reps can try and do their share for democracy, but I fear they generally lack the backing and the political clout to correct situations like this one; they get sidelined if they stir up too much trouble.
      (Scissors beat paper, money beats civil liberties.)

      Obsolete/monopolistic businesses like the the **AA's members generating FUD about IP rights in the media and pushing self-serving bills thru congress should be sued into the ground for the way they drive their agenda to the detriment of civil liberties; they aggresively try to change the rules for their own benefit with complete disregard for the impact this has on society.
      Now they succeeded in exporting their shenanigans to Sweden :-/

      I'm glad the Swedish media are making a big deal out of this.
      Too bad it will be kept a domestic issue. In a month most non-Swedes will have forgotten all about the raid on TPB, and it is unlikely Sweden will point fingers to whoever is behind this if it's the **AA. (Not proven, afaik.)

      Sorry if I sound a bit cynical, but
      a) Power corrupts. From what I've seen, a lot of politicians are attention whores when elections come around, and if they don't come with a pricetag, there's still intimidation by their peer politicians. Most of them just ride whatever issues are hot at the time as a vehicle to get more votes for their party. Lacking any real issues, they'll just invent or inflate a problem.
      b) I'm a dirty libertine with a hangover.

    8. Re:Shit or Shut the fuck up by init100 · · Score: 1

      If I was in that position, I would be greatly disappointed that my country gave in to such pressure,

      Yep, and that is one of my interests in this matter. I do not condemn the US for leaning on my government, but I do condemn my government for givig in to the pressure. But remember that some people won't turn down an opportunity to whine at the US, reasonable or not.

      My other interests in this matter concern the other suspicious aspects of this raid, such as DNA samples taken from their legal advisor (anyway, why would DNA be useful in an IP case?), refusal to allow suspects a legal advisor, covering of security cameras during the raid, seizure of a lot of unrelated servers, including a few political ones, etc, etc.

    9. Re:Shit or Shut the fuck up by fufubag · · Score: 1
      but it's hard when demonstrators are labelled terrorists and treated like animals (note that free speach in the US is ok, as long as it is the "right" speach, remember the celebrities demonstrating the gulf war?)

      labeled terrorists and treated like animals? source please. What about the celebrities who demonstrated the war? Last I heard they said what they wanted and they are still alive right? So what is your point?

    10. Re:Shit or Shut the fuck up by fufubag · · Score: 1

      You are exactly right. The only way a democracy will work is if ALL the people participate. Me writing my rep will alone do nothing. But if I started an orginization in my state to get thousands of people to contact our rep, and someone did that in every state then it would affect outcomes. Why? You said it yourself, the politicians want to stay in power. Their power comes from the people.

  121. PirateBay Back Online????????? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We must report it to the mpaa guys!

    www.mpaa.org/ReportPiracy.asp

  122. Re:Free Half Life T-Shirt? by hackwrench · · Score: 1

    According to your previous statement you either pay for things or do without. So, how is it that you are prancing around in a free Half Life T-shirt. According to your previous statement, you must have paid for the T-Shirt or done without.

  123. More than just a formal complaint. by Hackie_Chan · · Score: 1

    Representatives from two major political parties in Sweden, Folkpartiet and Vänsterpartiet have filed formal complaints against the Minister of Justice and members of his staff.
     
    In Sweden, it's clearly detailed in the constitution that the Ministers may not interfer, tell or even discuss an individual case or act of whatever field they are the Minister of. The members from the farmer and liberal parties filed the complaints to the Constitution Committee which oversees matters that might violate the Swedish constitution. Thomas Bodström was accused of using his position as a Minister to tell the Police to carry on this raid. That is clearly an illegal act if it were to be true. Bodström denies that he has done this.
     
    The Swedish constitution has some cool stuff in it actually... For example, the Riksdag has negative parlamentarism which means that if you forfeit your vote to elect a Regering (executive/government) it is counted as a Yes. This gives the interesting scenario where if the coalition parties forfeit to vote because they don't agree with the Prime Minister and minister cabinet presented they'll still be confirmed.
     
    Also there's the passage in the constitution that says if the entire monarch family dies and there is no clear person to elect as the new king/queen the Riksdag is given the authority to vote on whether to turn the country in to a Republic. It's funny/interesting because this is the only place in the entire constitution that deals with turning the country in to a Republic, actually.

    --

    What's so bad about being lazy? What if there was a war and nobody showed up?
  124. What to do? What to do? by IClavdivs · · Score: 1

    Almost everyone here seems to be in agreement that this was both an illegal raid and an unnecessary power play on behalf of the MPAA that may threaten US relations with Sweden. My questions is: Isn't there anything We Americans can do to make the MPAA pay for what it's done?

    --
    Now all we need is a little energon, and a lot of luck. -Optimus Prime
    1. Re:What to do? What to do? by theucsbwizrd · · Score: 1

      good question, I would also like to know what is possible to fight the MPAA/its supporters in the government, that an american citizen can do.

      --
      TheWizrd UCSB - Computer Science
  125. One man's frustration. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have frequent [attempted] political discussions with my parents. With friends and other family as well, of course, but my discussions with my parents tend to be the most interesting and warranted of smashing one's head against a wall in frustration. They are both hardcore, straight-ticket republicans who dutifully watch Fox News as all patriotic Americans should.

    They realize their news is probably slanted, but do not care to expend the effort to try and find out how or to what end$. Not that I blame them too much, it's a lot of effort, our news seems to try very hard to make sure of that. However, they simply accept Fox News as the whole God-given truth whilst decrying CNN as half a degree above communist (not to necessarily say it isn't). Furthermore, ALL internet news is fabricated by liberals who seek merely to usurp Bush's residency as one of the most successful presidents in history (Ok, this is a slight exaggeration on my part as I've gleaned from various occasional concessions, but they mostly think he is a great and swell guy, by golly).

    Someone posted a link to an interview with one of TPB's sysadmins, which I listened to and fed them some of the details. Notably the part involving the whole **AA->White House->Swedish Justice Department->Police->Illegal Raid chain of events. Every single detail was roundly denied by them as being too outlandish to have actually happened. There is no chance whatsoever that any of this was done by our government. Why would our government be able to tell another government what to do in spite of that action being against their laws? Positively absurd. Moreover, in spite of a large number of facts and event descriptions being presented in the interview, they were all LIBERALLY SLANTED facts, designed specifically by liberal spin doctors (of which the Republicans have none) as a smear on Bush's image. This is true to such a degree that listening to these lies is not even necessary, they can be dismissed before even considering such a misguided folly. Ascertaining facts. Pff. I'll stick with my TV-fed opinions and political-armchair-quarterback 15 second editorials between the nightly murder report and that picture of the kitten with 3 legs that overcame all the adversity thank you very much. (Apologies to sportscasters everywhere, as you are frequently far more thorough than most political analysts I see)

    ----------

    Copyright Infringement may be a modern day Axis of Evil, but I'm much more afraid of the Axis of Bunnies.

  126. Don't Copy that Floppy!! by knBIS · · Score: 1

    best video ever... will definately make me think twice before engaging in any software piracey http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=9045861006 530293045

  127. Bork bork bork! by abb3w · · Score: 1
    Why does the swedish chef keep mispronouncing swedish words?

    First, because he's not speaking Swedish, he's speaking mock-Swedish. And Second, because his native language is actually mock-Japanese, as was revealed during the Jean Stapleton episode of the Muppet Show.

    (Oh, I'm just wild about Harry....)
    --
    //Information does not want to be free; it wants to breed.
  128. Psychiatric help is needed! by abb3w · · Score: 1

    Ordinarily, I'd ask someone like you to share the really good drugs you have access to, but evidently you've already given away all of your anti-psychotics.

    --
    //Information does not want to be free; it wants to breed.
  129. Re:how do you ....? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  130. Why can't we see them doing it? by Paul+Crowley · · Score: 3, Insightful

    We have footage of police wandering around, and footage of cameras with plastic bags over them. Why no footage of a policeman putting a bag over a camera? In this country, CCTV cameras are mostly arranged so that if you try to disable one, you'll be caught on camera doing it by another.

    I really want a still image of a policeman putting a bag over a camera that I can distribute far and wide.

  131. Think for yourself by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I guess you're saying that American law is the supreme law of the world, handed down by god himself to the puritans, so that they might convince the entire world of the immorality of nipples, pot, and file sharing?

    Perhaps one day you will learn to think for yourself and realize this so-called 'piracy' isn't hurting anyone.

    Until then, remain steadfast in your blind alignment to your country/corporation's 'IP' interests. God, you spineless weasels make me sick.

    You are an anti-patriot, fighting your people's own morals and giving up your rights in the name of 'the war on terror'. You are hurting America.

    btw, haven't seen an MS apologist speak up in a while. Nice to hear you're still able to get online.

    1. Re:Think for yourself by TechnologyX · · Score: -1

      Perhaps one day you'll get a real job and realize that when people steal things, they hurt your income.

      And how the hell did you turn it into Anti Microsoft? Stupid OSS fuck.

      --
      Slashdot sucks
    2. Re:Think for yourself by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and when people make a digital copy of something, they aren't stealing from you. Try to understand this. It's a fact. A digital copy does not hurt you.

      As a musician, I want my music shared as much as possible, since I know that anyeone who does want to support the artist will come to my shows and buy my CDs regardless.

      As a regular person, I want to be able to back up my music and movies without worry and without hassle.

      If your product isn't good enough to stand on its own without DRM, then suck it. You don't deserve to be in business.

    3. Re:Think for yourself by TechnologyX · · Score: -1

      Yeah ok, any musician that thinks that is obviously so shitty to begin with that they couldn't sell their music even if they tried.

      As both a musician, far better than you, and a developer, again far better than you, I'm glad I don't have to deal with your shitty cover of Linkin Park or your shitty Sourceforge GPL calculator v3.5.678

      --
      Slashdot sucks
  132. Re:Free Half Life T-Shirt? by Ford+Prefect · · Score: 1

    According to your previous statement you either pay for things or do without. So, how is it that you are prancing around in a free Half Life T-shirt. According to your previous statement, you must have paid for the T-Shirt or done without.

    I bought a copy of Half-Life 2 over Steam, built a mod for it, for fun, in my spare time, had that downloaded a couple of hundred thousand times, got invited over to Seattle by Valve (travel and accommodation paid for by themselves) and spent a week there - and on the last day, got given a swag-bag containing two T-shirts and a book.

    So I think I did fairly well. One of the benefits of paying for software... ;-)

    --
    Tedious Bloggy Stuff - hooray?
  133. Are you trying to get Slashdot closed? by MarkByers · · Score: 1

    hey look, a google cache of a page linking directly to a torrent file of a copyrighted work!

    Hey, are you trying to get Slashdot closed down for assisting copyright infringement, by linking to a page that is a copy of a page that links to a file that includes a hash of a derivative of a copyrighted work?

    --
    I'll probably be modded down for this...
  134. New Server Location by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Looks like they moved to the Netherlands:

    From RIPE:

    inetnum: 85.17.40.0 - 85.17.40.255
    netname: LEASEWEB
    descr: LeaseWeb
    descr: P.O. Box 616
    descr: 3500AP, Utrecht
    descr: Netherlands
    descr: www.leaseweb.com
    remarks: Please send email to "abuse@leaseweb.com"
    for complaints
    remarks: regarding portscans, DoS attacks and spam.

  135. "Preview" is good... by Vryl · · Score: 1

    Fuckwit. Someone forgot to close their tags.

    Hrrrm. You are repeating the furphy again.

    Does the pirate bay list torrents of things that aren't "illegal"? I got "The Elephants Dream" from there.

    A single contradiction is all that is needed to destroy a general case. But you knew that didn't you...

    And, for your info, I STARTED with abuse, troll. Go away now, silly thing.

    1. Re:"Preview" is good... by Snaller · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Fuckwit

      Ok kid, if you can't behave then this is over.

      --
      If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
    2. Re:"Preview" is good... by Vryl · · Score: 1

      Moron, it's been over for quite a few posts now... I was basically putting a few shots into the rotting carcass of your argument just for good measure.

      If my pissy liddle ad hominems give you the excuse to run away wit ya tail tween ya legs, cos your arguments are rubbish then good for you!

      Your mistake was absolutism: "only purpose" and all that, and compounded by your ridiculous decision to stick by it, and your crap attempts at doing so.

      If you either said in the beginning or modified your statements to say something like "the overwhelming purpose" or "the main purpose" then I would have left you alone, FUCKWIT, but, no, you had to be a tard and keep on going.

      Good riddance!

  136. Your only good bit by Vryl · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Seems that I am arguing with a teenager

    Funny, that is what i was thinking.

    Not too shabby. Perhaps there is hope for you, young Padawan... but first you should concentrate on capitalising the perpendicular pronoun, and previewing.

    The Oxford Comma will come later.

  137. you have no choice? by YesIAmAScript · · Score: 1

    You said you have no choice but to download it?

    You act like you're a victim, that you're cornered by them.

    What about not watching it at all?

    Again, I'm not saying I never downloaded a TV show from the net, but when I do it, I don't tell myself that I'm being forced to do this. I've made a conscious decision to do what I did. And you are also.

    Your argument about theft is ridiculous. You're trying to apply your own definition to the word to make what you're doing not theft. Words have lots of meanings in English. What happens when someone steals a kiss? Did they actually take something away from someone? When two lovers steal away? Long before the MPAA got political, people were stealing cable? Did the cable company actually not have something anymore? The Russians stole the atomic bomb and other secrets from the US in the 50s, before the MPAA even existed. Yet all they did was duplicate information they weren't supposed to have.

    All these are examples of stealing in the English language. No one was actually deprived of property in any of the cases. Stop trying to redefine the language because you don't like that a word is applied to you.

    --
    http://lkml.org/lkml/2005/8/20/95
  138. Yep. I'm upset. by YesIAmAScript · · Score: 1

    Libraries shouldn't be facilitating IP theft like that.

    And are you arguing in later paragraphs that this isn't fair? Fair? Are you 10 years old? Going to run to mommy and daddy saying that your big brother isn't playing fair?

    No one ever said life is fair.

    I don't know what the "angry man yells at cloud" thing you refer to is. I don't see food ever being cheaper/more effective to replicate than to grow, so I don't see the situation arising. And Africa isn't starving for any reason that food replicators would fix anyway. Look up what happened in Somalia. Look at what is happening in Sudan right now. It's the same thing that Bob Geldof tried to fix with Live Aid. The problem isn't drought, the problem is their leaders are using food as a weapon against their own people. They only give food to those who have allegiance to them and pay tribute to them. The others starve. And if you try to send food in, they'll disrupt your food delivery chain to ensure that the people they don't want fed don't get fed. That's what happened when to Live Aid's food aid. That's what happened to US and UN food aid since then. And that's how we ended up in Somalia and making a mess of it.

    Boy, when I think of it, that just isn't fair. Who do I complain to about this?

    Another post asks a little better question, when half of people download, will I make half of people criminals? The answer is that I wouldn't. I would prefer to see the companies fix their business plans, or even to change the law. And it's starting. ABC offers their shows now, at least some of them.

    But in the meantime, each time I download something I shouldn't, I don't tell myself that I'm being forced into this. I'm doing it for my own reasons, right or wrong.

    --
    http://lkml.org/lkml/2005/8/20/95
    1. Re:Yep. I'm upset. by Thing+1 · · Score: 1
      I never said that life should be fair. I said that the social contract that the producers entered into with the public, in order to "lock up content", has been violated several times in my lifetime by illegally extending copyright. You did not address this in your response.

      From that social contract: "To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries." It does not specifically state that this balance should be "fair", so I apologize for my wording since it was not intended to incite.

      "Angry man yells at cloud" was a newspaper headline from the Simpsons, regarding the grandfather figure; I apologize for being confusing.

      I don't see food ever being cheaper/more effective to replicate than to grow, so I don't see the situation arising.

      You do not see that an engineered process can be more efficient than a random process? I cannot apologize for this; I see evidence of this every day, and cannot believe that you use a computer (to post to Slashdot) and have not witnessed it yourself. You are correct in that we cannot do it today; it's at most 50 years off, and likely 5 or 10 (barring civil war). We will be able to convert sunlight and dirt into steak in minutes, without having to wait years for the cow to grow and develop (and eat literally tons of crops and produce a similar amount of excrement).

      I agree with you about the political problems in Africa, and did not mean to bring that into the debate; it was simply a means of asking where you would draw the line if physical goods were as cheaply and easily copyable as digital goods, which you did not address.

      Your other poster is spot on: if a large percentage of the population participates in an activity, and that activity is currently against the law but was not in times past, then it makes good sense to check our presuppositions and perhaps eliminate the law. Primarily, for efficiency's sake: it would provide more law enforcement resources to catch criminals who harm their victims physically (the raid on The Pirate Bay took 50 cops, some of whom were taken off of child molestation investigations to help with the raid; this actively removed law enforcement resources from crimes with defenseless victims in order to prosecute a company which was in full compliance with the local laws; but, like the Internet which treats censorship as damage and routes around it, The Pirate Bay has now ensured that it will never go down again).

      I don't download anything I shouldn't. I live in the US, and they're cracking down on that sort of thing. It's somewhat interesting that my leisure time is basically filled with Slashdot, books, and videogames; I almost never watch TV or movies any more, and I really don't miss them.

      --
      I feel fantastic, and I'm still alive.
  139. Re:Free Half Life T-Shirt? by hackwrench · · Score: 1

    You miss the point. The content distribution people keep saying without the appropriate qualifiers that getting things are wrong without paying for them. You also failed to add the appropriate qualifying words. It seems to me that many people don't understand the effects of those qualifiers on the discussion and the content distribution people are avoiding them because they don't want them "cluttering up" the discussion. It's much easier to defend the principle of remuneration if you can just pretend that people need to be remunerated whether they want it or not.

  140. Re:Free Half Life T-Shirt? by Ford+Prefect · · Score: 1
    Oh, for fuck's sake - stop with the pseudo-intellectual doublethink and legal definitions masturbation. Trying to justify stealing people's work (oh, sorry, it's not stealing, it's copyright infringement, blah blah blah) might work in your head, but the truth is you just like free films, music and software, bugger the consequences.

    And as for the benefits of paying for stuff, just imagine if I turned up at Valve with a warezed copy of Half-Life 2 on my laptop. Would they have:
    1. Congratulated me on my brave new approach to the distribution of their intellectual property,
    2. Agreed that payment for their services was simply 'cluttering up' the discussion, or
    3. Kicked me out of the building, cancelled my return air ticket and remaining hotel accommodation and demanded an apology?


    Remuneration may not be some physical law of the universe, but I like to thank the people who make the stuff I buy. And, occasionally, they thank me back... ;-)
    --
    Tedious Bloggy Stuff - hooray?
  141. Re:Free Half Life T-Shirt? by hackwrench · · Score: 1

    Oh, for fuck's sake - stop with the pseudo-intellectual doublethink and legal definitions masturbation.

    Funny, I don't see it that way. If you do, then I suggest you quit holding up your end of the circumstances of talking about the subject.


    Now back to the trenches...

    The rest of your response doesn't seem to understand the nuanced action in this theater of war.

    First, the whole point of the Valve thing is so that they can bask in the glow of their admirers. In their minds, at the very least, it is not part of the arena of debate.

    In that sort of situation, their priorities are different than when they are doing the bluster on piracy.

    The purpose of doing as you suggested would be to force them back into the arena of debate.

    In an environment with sane procedures for negotiating exchange of goods, copyright infringement is closer to stealing. There is also the state of the copyright infringer's mind. If a neutral country or any of its citizens in WW I decided to go over to Germany to knock over banks for the sole purpose of enriching their own pockets with no interest of helping the war effort against Germany, that meets the definition of stealing.

    It's expected that profit during war goes up as people need that profit to offset the risk of doing business during war. However, the more that a person or group of people take advantage of the war situation to increase profits, the less that it is appropriate to consider it stealing to take from them.

  142. Too much. by Corngood · · Score: 1

    $2 might be ok for a couple really great programmes, but right now I can watch a hell of a lot more than 15 episodes of programming for the $30 I spend per month on cable. Even just watching the daily show and colbert report would cost too much with that model. The other issue I would have is that it would force me to make a value judgement for everything I watch, including programmes I've never seen before.

    An alternative is a two-tiered system with and without advertising, sort of like TV vs. DVD.

  143. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... Not troll by Snaller · · Score: 1

    (Not a troll, fact)

    Nonsense. The sole purpose of pirate bay is to facilitate crime, Google has a ton of uses and occasionally, very rarely, they may end up hosting something they shouldn't - for a brief while. Google removes things from the cache, the pirate bay tells people to fuck off. They have been asking for it forever.

    --
    If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
  144. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... (no troll) by Snaller · · Score: 1

    (God, I wish the 12 year olds didn't have moderation priviliges here)

    "The owners of the Pirate Bay don't post any torrents. "

    They host torrents to illegal material, they know so and refuse to do something about it. That makes them culpable.

    "There are arguments to be made that Google caching is more legal than TPB, "

    I doubt there are arguments to be made that Googles cache is illegal or has anything whatsoever to do with the pirate bay. Their intent appears to be criminal, Googels isn't.

    --
    If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
  145. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... (No troll) by Snaller · · Score: 1

    "They host text files which list ip addresses. "

    No, torrents are binary files.

    "Yes, I'm sure they're aware people use those text files to ultimately end up with files which infringe upon copyright of american corporations, but under Sweedish law this is not illegal. "

    I don't believe that.

    "So they are not 'culpable' for anything under the laws of the country in which they live and operate. "

    That remains to be seen.

    "So, if I sell you a crow-bar, and tell you it's really effective for breaking into houses, I'm a criminal? "

    It might yes.

    --
    If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
  146. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... (No troll) by Snaller · · Score: 1

    "Pirate Bay no more INTENDED to faciliate crime than an Interstate Highway is intended to provide a getaway route for bank robbers. "

    False.

    "That they CAN be used that way is up to the user.......or highway builders would all be de facto accessories to every crime aided or committed by the existence of highways. "

    Nonsense.

    --
    If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
  147. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... (no troll) by Snaller · · Score: 1

    "Pirate Bay is *more* legal than Google. "

    Nonsense.

    (Come on! What fucking nitwit of a retarded child can claim its more legal than Google, and then they mod ME down!)

      The sole purpose of pirate bay is to facilitate crime, Google has a ton of uses and occasionally, very rarely, they may end up hosting something they shouldn't - for a brief while. Google removes things from the cache, the pirate bay tells people to fuck off. They have been asking for it forever.

    --
    If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
  148. Re:Sucks to be the MPAA... (Not troll) by Snaller · · Score: 1

    "So your statement is inaccurate. "

    No, I don't think it is. Their purpose is to facilitate crime - however, you have found a legal argument that *might* work in court. They could claim that, of course nobody is likely to believe them whey they call themselves "the pirate bay".

    "When its in google's cache, they are directly hosting it on their servers- that's a crime, no ambiguity included. "

    Indeed no ambiguity, they are innocent. They don't put anything there, it is gathered automatically without intent. Makes all the difference

    --
    If Google really cared they would fix Android Chrome to reflow text, instead of discriminating
  149. Who exactly is in this "international consensus"?? by botik32 · · Score: 1

    Please enumerate the countries that are making pressure on Sweden. Are they Mexico? Canada? Brazil? Russia? Ukraine? China? India? Japan? Who are these mythical international countries that are forcing Sweden to comply with the so-called consensus?

    So far I see only the U S of A.

  150. Pratchett... [offtopic] by botik32 · · Score: 1

    Ummm.... Pratchett : ))) I totally loved the 'Good Omens book' with Neil Gailman. Do you, per chance, remember the title of the tentacled book?

  151. Re:Who exactly is in this "international consensus by Anonymous+Brave+Guy · · Score: 1

    Google for WIPO, and in particular the three criteria that any local exemption to copyright must meet to comply with the major treaties.

    --
    If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
  152. check out the stats TBP posted by AMD4L1PH3 · · Score: 1

    Just some stats...

    ... here are some reasons why TPB is down sometimes - and how long it usually takes to fix:

    Tiamo gets *very* drunk and then something crashes: 4 days

    Anakata gets a really bad cold and noone is around: 7 days

    The US and Swedish gov. forces the police to steal our servers: 3 days

    .. yawn.


    rotfl - http://thepiratebay.org/blog.php/
  153. Gotta love torrents... by The8BitHero · · Score: 1

    ...meanwhile usenet flys under the radar.