Slashdot Mirror
Pirate Bay Raid Investigation Finished
A Pirate writes "The Swedish Ombudsmen of Justice (JO) has finished the investigation of the Pirate Bay raid where close to 200 servers were confiscated. Just a fragment of these were actually Pirate Bay's and this led to both the police and prosecutor being charged with official misconduct, but the judges dropped the cases. In the report published by the JO he concludes that the judges were right, but there is also some very interesting information about how the MPA, IFPI and the American embassy tried to push the Swedish Minister of Justice and Secretary of State into influencing the police and the prosecutor to act upon The Pirate Bay."
The Office of JO is officially non-political, but thanks for trying to play. Any more ignorance about the world around you feel like sharing?
And here in America, the government is officially by, of and for the people.
Any other spectacularly ignorant insights you want to share with us?
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
"[P]olice and prosecutor being charged with official misconduct, but the judges dropped the cases"
a nd#2004_death_in_custody_controversy_and_riot or do a search.)
And this is why the police and prosecutor will continue to break the law. This happens everywhere, unless the police are required to actually obey the law, there is no incentive to. Even when they are punished, it generally amounts to a slap on the wrist.
The police can and will arrest people who have done nothing wrong (I and a number of others at a protest during the Forbes conference in Sydney in 2005 for example, all the charges were either dropped or thrown out of court, except those people who pleaded guilty).
It isn't just illegal raids or arrests either. In Queensland an Aboriginal man was killed while in police custody. It was latter shown that he shouldn't have even been arrested, and that he was beaten to death. The police officer responsible continues in his duties (though he has been transferred from Palm Island). Actually, apparently he has now been charged, with manslaughter, after a former NSW chief judge examined the evidence.
(See this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palm_Island,_Queensl
So, it is obvious that the police need to be held accountable for their actions. While it is possible in most places to sue them (in the civil court), and this is what the various owners and users of these seized servers should do, the judge often finds that the police "were just doing their duty". No they fucking weren't! They were going beyond their duty.
I wank in the shower.
I don't want to seem like I think you are ignorant, but could you please point out, in great and precise detail, how TPB has *ACTUALLY* deprived an artist, or group of artists (name them all) of money they would have received if TPB did not exist, and exactly how much money that would be?
Your comment is as much crying wolf as that of any RIAA lawyer.
Support NYCountryLawyer RIAA vs People
Wow, this sounds like hassling that has worked against TPB.
You host TPB servers. We will just randomly take the servers to the police station and shut down your business for weeks. And, you can't touch us with misconduct charges or anything.
I'd be assembling a team of rabid attack lawyers, and training them to go for the wallet.
You don't need to train lawyers to go for the wallet, that's the instinct that makes them lawyers in the first place.
Blank until
trying to sue the Swedish government will only be a long meaningless process which generally results in you paying them a lot of money
So what you're saying is that if only one person will stand up and say "Yes, I would have purchased product XYZ but I downloaded it instead" you'll admit that piracy actually does cause monetary damage to the original creators of the content? I'm pretty sure there are a few people who would admit that they took the cheaper option.
In a lot of TPB cases we're not talking about $0.99 per song either, but about somebody who would rather not pay $700 for Photoshop. Maybe Adobe wouldn't have gotten the money, but it's very possible that MacroMedia (bought JASC) is out the $150 they get for Paintshop as an alternative. So even though there is no monetary damage to Adobe, somebody else also loses a sale.
So if a company suffered financial damage because a careless raid took down their website, they have no recourse? Perhaps America's not so bad after all.
Not to put too fine a point on it, but the Constitution of the United States is a "living" document. However, that said, the amount of life in it is only equal to the interest of the People of the United States in maintaining and safeguarding it. The Federal Government's task is to interpret the will of the people and create consensus (not just majority rule), the modify the document accordingly. This has been done in the past to rectify the injustice of slavery, provide women their given right to vote, and even to limit the power of the President of the United States by limiting the number of terms possible to serve in the office to two.
If there's a problem with a "living" document, it's that it has been alive so long, that provisions contained within it have outlived their original intent and have not "evolved" to stay current with the progress of society. I think it's safe to say this is true of a great many non-Constitutional laws as well. I think a new breath of life needs to be applied to the Constitution if it is to continue to server the people in this century and those to come.
GetOuttaMySpace - The Anti-Social Network
In my mind, there is a significant difference between the US government meddling in a country's political processes, and some religious group taking someone to court. You should not equate the US population, its government, US corporations, various religious institutions, and other organizations under one banner of "US meddling." Its not like there is one master brain that controls all of those groups and people.
Does anyone still think the world would stop revolving if the MPAA decided not to make anymore movies? If every RIAA artist stopped releasing new music?
Sure, there would be a period of adjustment.
Then we'd all go on with our lives.
PB can buy all the Sealands they want; Hollywood and the rest will just sue the ISPs for providing the bandwidth.
Given their budgets they could also hire some mercenaries and mount an attack on Sealand themselves.
If they filmed it they might make a profit on it, too.
Copyright (c) 2007 by me writing as "Ungrounded Lightning Rod".
Leave a followup to any posting in my journal with a firm offer if you want to do the movie. Otherwise I may sue for copyright infringement if such an attack is made, filmed, and the film shown for profit - even on a news operation under the same umbrella corporation. B-)
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
The problem with that is, just whose definitions do you use? The Constitution, like any written document, is subject to interpretation simply because while individual words have a limited range of meaning, their many and varied combinations can be interpreted along a wide spectrum. That's why we have a court system: to try and create a reasonable definition of a law in any given circumstance. Two opposing sides in an argument will generally insist on an interpretation biased toward their definitions. It's up to the court system to try and create consensus, and where not possible or practicable, to enforce a definition based on the court's definitions. And so then you have appeals, as people disagree with the court's definitions, all the way up to the United States Supreme Court, which is the final arbiter in most legal cases.
The same problem exists with the Ten Commandments. Thou shalt not kill. Seems straightforward. But thou shalt not kill what? Men? Women? Dogs? Cat? Ameobas? Fetuses? You can take a simple 4-word phrase and interpret it in myriad ways, all because of what it doesn't say as much as what it does say.
GetOuttaMySpace - The Anti-Social Network
As a legal *OWNER* of PaintShopPro 7,
You dont own PaintShopPro 7, you license it. This is a key distinction that many people forget.
unzip; strip; touch; finger; mount; fsck; more; yes; unmount; sleep
+1 Funny doesn't add to karma, so people who want to give a little boost might mod +1 Insightful (Funsightful!) or Interesting...
I just bought an iPod. By your logic, maybe Creative wouldn't have gotten the money, but it's very possible that Microsoft is out the $300 they get for a Zune as an alternative. So even though there is no monetary damage to Creative, somebody else also loses a sale.
This isn't logic, this is marketing. It's PR that Intellectual Property interests (BSA, RIAA, MPAA, etc) have been working on for quite some time. It simply doesn't hold up to rational discourse. Monetary damages due to pirated intellectual property are nothing but myth. And as community-shared intellectual property matures, the myth just becomes more and more absurd.
So let's say the recording industry has 150,000 copies of Brittany's Greatest Hits on the shelf, and someone makes a digital copy of same. How many copies does the recording industry have? 150,000 -- just like when they started.
So when you come up with a way to make a copy of a Corvette on a car dealer's lot, but leave the original one there on the lot, you will have an analogous situation. Otherwise you've fallen into the trap of equating copyright violations with theft, the very mistake the *IAA are trying to talk everyone into.
- "History shows again and again how nature points out the folly of men" -- Blue Oyster Cult, 'Godzilla'
well, except it didn't contain any illegal content. just a bunch of .torrent files.
Erik Dalén
It's just funny.
It's funny, because some american politician are pathetic how they try to actually take over the net.
If anything happen to the root DNS, the history will just follow the same path it did with any open-source or other open- projects : fork.
Just like when CDDB2 became comercial, poeple just switched to freedb.org (which contained the last public copy of the data), if the root DNS gets pwned by politicians with agenda, most probably a couple of alternative server will emerge. And because this is usually handled by the ISP itself (they just change which DNS server their servers have to ask), the users won't even notice the change.
Maybe there may be some initial fragmentation, as people try to settle for 1 single root-DNS-replacement (and not a dozen of non-synced-between servers). But as mot countries administer their own domains only com/org/net and such will be affected.
In fact there are already some alternative root DNS that exists, in order to provide new top-domains not provided by the official root.
So, no. The loss of the root DNS will not be the end of the internet as we know it. It'll be only a way to produce a lot of pissed administrators.
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
Considering most people outside of people who would visit Pirate bay (aka hackers/crackers/pirates/ what ever you want to be called) and people on sites like Slashdot (cool people) don't even know a raid happened. I'd say it'd be forgotten in a month.
It's not waco. No one died, a bunch of computers got seized... Sadly no one cares no matter how many rights are brought up.