Slashdot Mirror


BitTorrent Site Admin Sent To Prison

Marc wrote in with a Torrentfreak story which opens: "The 23 year old Grant Stanley has been sentenced to five months in prison, followed by five months of home detention, and a $3000 fine for his role in the private BitTorrent tracker Elitetorrents. This ruling is the first BitTorrent related conviction in the US. Stanley pleaded guilty earlier this year to 'conspiracy to commit copyright infringement' and 'criminal copyright infringement.' He is one of the three defendants in the Elitetorrents operation better known as 'Operation D-Elite.'"

15 of 685 comments (clear)

  1. Silly Punishment by 9mm+Censor · · Score: 5, Interesting

    1) I see no need to send someone to jail for copyright infringement. The punishment does not fit the crime, and its not helping society, by removing a danger, nor do I suspect it will be useful in rehabilitating.
    2) I hope he stocked up on torrents of stuff to watch/listen/play during house arrest.

    1. Re:Silly Punishment by grasshoppa · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Five months in jail is, to my mind, fitting to the crime.

      Then you aren't thinking.

      What is prison for? What's the purpose to putting someone in prison? To answer this, let's look at what prison does; It removes a person from the general population. Why would this make sense for a bt operator? Are they a threat to themselves or others? No, it's silly to imply otherwise.

      A fitting punishment to this crime can and should be settled in civil court; They are forced to make restitutions.

      So you tell me, which makes more sense; Taking someone off the streets and stop them from being a productive member of society. OR, let them continue working and paying off a fine. Which makes more sense given the crime involved? Which makes more sense for soceity ( remember, over crowded prisons )? Which makes more sense for those wronged ( what benefit does the RIAA get out of him being in prison aside from evil pleasure )? And finally, what makes more sense for the convicted?

      --
      Mod me down with all of your hatred and your journey towards the dark side will be complete!
    2. Re:Silly Punishment by Schemat1c · · Score: 3, Interesting

      And who says the definition of a crime cam't change? It's not he didn't know what he were doing was determined to be unlawful and punishable as a federal crime.

      When the penalties of a law does more damage than the crime it's addressing then the law is wrong. If we in the US could just hold all laws to that standard I think we could clean up the books quite a bit and put a lot of lawyers out of business, so in other words it will never happen.

      --

      "Nobody knows the age of the human race, but everybody agrees that it is old enough to know better." - Unknown
    3. Re:Silly Punishment by Chandon+Seldon · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Which means that only suckers/chumps would pick the pumpkins (or write the software, or create music), since their hard work would be immediately leeched away.

      Here's a hint... if everyone could get infinite free pumpkins then anyone who picked pumpkins *would* be a chump.

      Software's not quite the same. Software is a complex tool that lets people accomplish things - accomplishing things is worthwhile, so software will continue to be developed even if nobody buys it.

      A more interesting example is expensive Hollywood movies - as home thearters get as good as cinemas they may stop being sustainable. That's sad, but it's not so sad that I'd be willing to give up basic freedoms to preserve the MPAA's business model.

      --
      -- The act of censorship is always worse than whatever is being censored. Always.
  2. Captain Obvious breaks it down for 'yall by jmorris42 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Pirate caught and hung, film at 11. Or as 'hung' as our justice system can manage; I mean hell, murder only rates a couple of years if it is your first offense and it wasn't a brutal gangland slaying or anything like that.

    The Napster kerfluffle should have told anyone with three brain cells that building a site for the express purpose of putting people with a copy of a copyrighted file in contact with people who want a copy is infringement. The technology that implements it isn't all that important, it is the intent. And elitetorrents was ALL about warez. Just because the guy wasn't running an FTP site hosting the files wasn't going to save his butt and he should have known it wouldn't.

    Don't like the laws? Either work to change em or violate them as an act of civil disobedience and accept the consequences in the hope of gaining sympathy for your cause and eventual change. But don't act shocked that the operator of what was a major warez site got busted and sent up the river.

    --
    Democrat delenda est
  3. Thank god I feel so much safer now by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    NOT.

    My guess is that he nor any of his users ever got any chance to vote on any copyright law. Can't say I have. Have you? Have you ever gotten to vote on any copyright issue?

    Hell, I never even agreed to be any citizen of any country. Show me a signature where I did. So therefore, how do any laws apply to him, or me? As far as I'm concerned, if you have no say so in the making of a law, then you have no obligation whatsoever to have to abide by it.

    Kind of like your neighbors down the street getting together and making an assinine aggreement, that all windows in the neighborhood must be left open in the winter time. And then enforcing that law on you. Fining you and or imprisoning you when you don't abide by it. Assembling a police force of patrollers to enforce this rule and smashing down the door and taking prisoner those who are in violation of it. Conformity and enforcement at the end of a barrel of gun.

    Only the neighbors aren't down the street, they are 100 miles, or 1000 miles away. Or worse, somewhere back in time, even before you were even born.

    Tell me the US version of representational democracy / republic isn't a total crock of ****....

    Further, if you're under 18, you have no say so whatsoever. If you're over 18, your say so is generally limited to the joke of a vote. Which is nothing but a weak concession to undermine your primary right, which is the right to riot.

  4. Re:Guilty of what? by retro128 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    There isn't going to be a trial. The prosecutors probably offered him a deal, and he plead guilty. He probably would have been looking at a hell of a lot more time if it went to a jury trial. I certainly wouldn't trust my future to the mouth breathers they get on the jury. After all, all the smart people are dodging the duty because they have jobs that pay more than $5 a day.

    --
    -R
  5. Stupid is as stupid does by Timesprout · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Seriously how fucking dense do you have to be if you think putting up a torrent to Star Wars III: Revenge of the Sith before it was released to cinemas was not going to put you top of the MPAA shitlist and destined for special attention.

    --
    Do not try to read the dupe, thats impossible. Instead, only try to realize the truth
    What truth?
    There is no dupe
  6. Re:"What are you in for" by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Rape

    Murder

    Theft

    Or..

    Drug posession

    Helping people download music


    Uh.. this raises a question: Would he go to a prison with rapists, murders, and other violent people or would he go somewhere where he'd sit and think about what he did instead of worrying for his life?
    --

    "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

  7. Martha Stewart | Grant Stanley by pembo13 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    ...crimes that benifit herself and deal with actual money : 5 months

    Grant Stanley, crime characterized as sharing : 5 years of butt sex.

    --
    "Thanks for all the money you paid to us. We've used it to buy off ISO among other things" -Microsoft
  8. Re:Great punishment. by westlake · · Score: 3, Interesting
    He probably made cash, only has to pay $3k and gets a five month vacation out of his parent's basement.

    it seems appropriate to insert a small reminder here that a federal criminal record can have long term consequences.

  9. USSR by Ilmarin77 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Funny, back in USSR people used to be put to jail for distributing "political information"
    Now, in USA person gets into jail for distributing music. I guess this is the real Democracy for you :)

  10. A better way to make your point by KKlaus · · Score: 3, Interesting

    It's not a question of greater or lesser penalty, even though it comes off that way because all of us slashdotters would rather sell our houses than go to jail. Sending people to jail was never intended to be just a punishment (altough it is a pretty good one), it was intended to remove people from society that posed a significant enough threat to justify the expense of locking them up until they can behave better. Murderers, people who commit assault, etc obviously fit the bill.

    I hope we haven't reached the point were copyright infringement is considered a "menace to society."

    --
    Relax I just want some peanuts.
  11. The account of a former prisoner by BeeBeard · · Score: 4, Interesting

    This is according to a friend of mine who was sent to prison for 18 months for his actions during what was supposed to be a peaceful protest, and was also sent to county for a similar offense but the sentence was shorter:

    Prisoners are not nearly as rape-happy as they're made out to be in popular culture. There are fights, drug deals, and a lot of angst and widespread hopelessness. But the few outright rapists in the general population are stigmatized and not well-respected. Keeping to yourself and minding your own business go a long way in lockup.

    In comparing federal to county: You are better supervised in federal prison, which means there are actually far fewer assaults, sexual or otherwise. Federal prisons have more controls in place for dealing with problems.

    And that's about all he was willing to share on the subject. Thankfully, I have managed to stay out of prison myself, so what I am imparting to you is second-hand information. :)

  12. Re:Good question by CohibaVancouver · · Score: 3, Interesting
    We should give farm subsidies to Afghanies to make it cost effective for them to grow, say, corn, instead of opium poppies. Etc.

    I recall reading one right-wing think tank that said the west should buy up the entire yearly opium output from Afghanistan, refine it into morphine and give it to the third world's hospitals. This would be cheaper than the 'war on drugs' and would provide the third world with a drug that they have great trouble obtaining.