The Pirate Bay About To Relaunch Suprnova.org

kungfujesus writes "The Pirate Bay crew has been working on this secret project for quite some time now. Back in April they wrote a cryptic post on their blog announcing that something was coming. In a response to this announcement TPB admin Brokep told TorrentFreak: "The past, the present and the future. It's all the same, but one thing's for sure, we will radiate for weeks", today it became clear that he was referring to the resurrection of Suprnova."

Comments

But with mininova

[Cameron McCormack]

who needs suprnova?

Re:But with mininova

[Jugalator]

But is this a "problem" with Mininova or increased P2P site competition? TPB, IsoHunt, TorrentSpy, ...

I don't think Suprnova will resolve that, but we'll see.

Re:But with mininova

[Danse]

But is this a "problem" with Mininova or increased P2P site competition? TPB, IsoHunt, TorrentSpy, ... Isn't TorrentSpy pretty much dead since they now have to turn over their logs to pretty much anyone who wants them?

Re:But with mininova

[pedramnavid]

Unless you live in Canada

Re:Who needs it

[originalnih]

The Pirate Bay is crap. Demonoid is far better.

scofflaws

[TheSHAD0W]

Speaking as a BitTorrent client developer, I have to opine that BitTorrent is a terrible way to distribute pirated content. All the things that make it a good tool for distributing LEGITIMATE content work against it when what's being shipped around is against the law; it's too easy to track down the people involved in downloading and uploading it, and any attempt to limit that significantly reduces the network's ability to handle the load.

The only reason BitTorrent is being used is because there are plenty of scofflaws out there who want to share this data, and BitTorrent works great to amplify their efforts. Tracking down the initial sources is a bit difficult but not impossible, but there are a myriad of other sources waiting in the wings.

Scoffing the law is a grand tradition in the United States; from moonshiners, to ignoring the double-nickel speed limit on the roads, we've turned our noses up at laws which, while they may have some social benefit, we feel they restrict us too harshly. Often those laws wind up causing more problems than they solve; ask someone who wound up poisoned by ethylene glycol from an illegal alcohol still made from a car's radiator.

In this case we have people being sued, fined and jailed for trading long strings of ones and zeros. The "intellectual property" owners tell us these strings belong to them, even though those strings can vary enormously (re-encoding video alters the data entirely) they still assert ownership. One innocuous file on one's desktop may spell disaster. But with hundreds of millions of people around the world throwing them around, it's practically impossible to stop.

One website returning to life doesn't really mean that much in terms of what's being traded, but it is indeed a symbol showing how futile the fight to enforce the ownership of ideas is; after all, how can one own an idea?

Re:scofflaws

[QuantumG]

That's great. The Pirate Bay operate in a locale where this material *is* legal to distribute.

So your entire argument is pointless.

Re:scofflaws

[CrackedButter]

America was founded by scoffing the law, remember the Boston Tea Party?

Re:scofflaws

[Jugalator]

That's great. The Pirate Bay operate in a locale where this material *is* legal to distribute.

If you're saying material = the actual file data: no, it's not. I'm from Sweden and it's all illegal to distribute (download AND upload) actual material without the copyright owner's explicit permission. It is NOT illegal to host torrent files though, it's quite logically considered different from the material, with file hashes and tracker info basically all they contain. This is being supported by an old BBS case of 1996 where it was decided in the BBS site's favor to host indices of warezed material.

Re:scofflaws

[Supurcell]

Yeah, we were founded by scoffing at unjust, unfair and immoral laws. The idea that you shouldn't steal copyrighted work doesn't quite seem to fit in those catagories...

It isn't stealing copyrighted work, it's copying copyrighted work. And the penalties for breaking such a law are unjust, unfair, and immoral.

Slashdot:Official message board of the pirate bay

[antifoidulus]

or at least it feels like it. Why is it that everytime someone at the pirate bay sneezes it makes it on to the front page of slashdot? You download torrents from the internet, well good for you, I'm so proud! But there is more to tech than people who spend their lives watching MPAA movies while cursing out the MPAA

*sigh*

[SilentChris]

I'm always bothered when I read articles like this because I know the Slashdot party line is always "File sharing good, fuck the content creators". I get upset because I think of my little brother, who's basically been screwed by piracy.

My little brother has a band. The music is quite good. The band is quite popular locally. It's so popular, in fact, that people bootleg their music and share it across the internet.

At first they were quite happy about this. They were reaching a much larger audience. Surely these people will come to their concerts and buy their CDs if they like the music (at least, that's what Slashdot always says will happen).

However, it didn't. Turns out (from conversations with their fans on their message board) that no one wants to buy their music. They like it, but hwy buy the music when fans can download every one of their albums for free online? Also, concert attendance has stayed flat. The pirating of their music hasn't suddenly increased attendance like they hoped it would.

So, while the band has a large fanbase (and it's growing), they've had barely enough to scrap by. My brother personally cleans a local diner's grease pit every night for a free dinner. They haven't (yet) gotten a recording contract, and I personally hope they do before my brother is actually eating the grease. :P

Long story short: don't believe everything you read on Slashdot. While I agree that the big content holders don't deserve any sympathy, there are artists out there that actually ARE hurting from piracy. It's mostly the little guys, and I haven't found one comment on Slashdot yet that recognizes this is as a problem.

Re:*sigh*

[dunezone]

Man I agree totally with you. This is hurting the little guy worse then its hurting the corporate level. I hate reading the countless comments praising them as heroes or saints at Pirate Bay.

Imagine the little guy putting countless hours and his heart and soul into developing a piece of software and offering it at a reasonable price. Then he hopes onto Pirate Bay and searches for it, and then he sees it being distributed by hundreds of people. Now some would feel happy that their software is being used. Unfortunately, that man is looking to make an income off of the software he sells. That man is now devastated and theres nothing he can do about it.

Pirate Bay is horrible. They know what their doing over there. I don't care if they operate in a country that by their law says they can do what they do. I don't care if they think their sticking it to the man. Those two excuses are getting old. And the worst part is how arrogant Pirate Bay is about all this.

Now most of you wont care of what I said. Thats fine. But I personally know someone who is devastated that his software is being distributed for free and theres not a god damn thing he can do about it. And I bet theres people on Slashdot that are seeing the same thing.

Re:*sigh*

[scottrocket]

Another way of looking at this, is that the people who download the music aren't going to buy it anyway, so why not encourage them to download your brother's music; over time, they may develop a strong preference for his music, & reward him later. If some of them don't, you haven't really lost anything. Or your brother and his musical peers could set up a streaming co-op say, with hundreds of titles & then pepper modest amounts of advertising every 15 minutes or so. A lot of people are accustomed to internet radio: If it goes the way of the dodo, these indie artists may well be the ones to fill (& perhaps satisfy) the demands of an existing audience. Tell your brother to keep plugging away! :)

Re:*sigh*

[sumdumass]

While this seems like an obvious troll, I will entertain your scenario with a couple I know of personally.

I used to be in a band, I was never real good but the other members were. We cut a few tracks and all, played a few bars and local joints, even a couple festivals. We never were conceded or stupid enough to think we could do this full time seeing how we got half of the 2 dollar cover charge at most dive bars and they seemed to over charge us for our drinks. I don't know, maybe I could drink 20 beer and 5 or 6 shots in the 3 hours we played? (could explain why I sucked). So long story short, we all kept our jobs and did it as a hobby while at the same time working to get a contract and all. After all, there is probably 200 bands in every mid sized town and how many famous bands with contracts? It isn't likely that being in a band will amount to much mor then just that with all the competition out there.

Well, our band eventually we split up. Work got to involved for me to spend the time necessary and the others were playing around with different bands and all. I had some of our stuff in the shared directory with XoloX which was the popular local file sharing utility. Eventually, I have friends unrelated to this venture asking me if I knew who that band was. I instantly recognized the tunes and told them. Well, he searched the other members out and attempted to form a band with them. I ended up cutting some tracks for them too and shared them.

While they didn't make it rich, they did get a decent following and even though most of the band members moved on, they still have the band together and play more or less for fun but still do gigs like bars and festivals. One of the people was contacted and wrote two songs for someone in Nashville, It wasn't a popular singer rather then a company that sells the songs to them.

I sit back and read your scenario, I think when ever I see non famous musicians in the movies, they all seem dirt poor. I wonder if there is something to this? All my friends in the band continued working and didn't resort to doing something he couldn't do well enough to get paid for just for a meal. All of them have decent paying jobs, while one went on to become a doctor, the others took different paths and became lawyers or started their own companies doing stuff they were good at doing.

So as I see it, your brother doesn't need people to stop sharing music, he need to either get better or find a real job. It would be nice if we could all live in la la land, but when our parents kick us out, we have to think about real life and get on with it. You could probably do your brother a favor by telling him to get a job. It doesn't mean he has to give up his playing or the band, it just means he needs ot take care of himself first.

Re:*sigh*

[untaken_name]

So... I want to understand what you're saying. You're blaming your brother's band's lack of a recording contract on filesharing? Doesn't that seem a bit of a stretch to you? Should not the recording companies be held responsible? Also, how do we know that your brother and his band are doing their part to get signed? If all they're doing is waiting around for some A&R guy to download their music...well they could be waiting a while. Also, while in your brother's case, greater exposure may not have led to greater concert attendance, it seems logical that a broader base of people who know who your band is and like your music would lead to a larger pool of possible concert attendees, at the very least. This is why anecdotal evidence is poor evidence, because it is difficult to label corner cases as such without proper statistical grounding. One case is not a good sample size.

Re:*sigh*

[Jah-Wren Ryel]

I'm always bothered when I read articles like this because I know the Slashdot party line is always "File sharing good, fuck the content creators". If there is a "slashdot party line" it is "fuck the distribution cartel and their obsolete business model" not the content creators. Right now, the creators are caught in the crossfire. But since your brother isn't even signed, he still has the freedom to think outside the box and step outside of the firefight.

Tell your little brother to start thinking of recorded music the same way he thinks of live music - as a performance that he can sell tickets to.

Record each live performance and then set up a paypal collection plate on his website, when the fans have put enough money into the collection plate, the band puts the MP3's up for FREE download. Promote it as concerts for people who couldn't make it to the concert.

Do the same for studio recordings -- one song, a set of songs, even the entire studio session, outtakes and all.

Sell vanity performances where, for some suitably expensive fee, a guy can have the band record a version of the song that substitutes his girlfriend/wife/kid/enemy's name in the lyrics. For even more money, perform and record THAT version live at a concert

The reason your brother is being hurt by piracy is because he's been brainwashed by the content cartel to ignore the profitable opportunities that the internet makes possible.

Re:*sigh*

[cliffski]

the pirate bay do it to make money:
http://rixstep.com/1/20060708,00.shtml
20,000 Euros a day, also estimated at 9 million dollars a year, in advertising.

your friends band may lose out, but a bunch of swedes who take his work and give it away for free are doing just fine. Nice people huh?

Re:*sigh*

[Jah-Wren Ryel]

Unfortunately, that man is looking to make an income off of the software he sells. That man is now devastated and theres nothing he can do about it. You know how regular urban people just dehydrate and die or starve to death if they get lost in the desert? But the people who grew up there are able to survive because they know the 'lore' of the desert - how to take advantage of what appears to be barren surroundings - like what shriveled up plants actually store potable water, how to catch small animals for food, etc.

Your hypothetical software developer is like the urbanite lost in the desert. If he knew how to take advantage of the situation, then he COULD do something about it. All those people who download and actually use the software - not the 99% who download it, play with it and then delete, but the people for whom it is actually useful - those people are potential customers for version 2.0.

They all clearly need the software, they probably all have ideas about how it could be improved. If this hypothetical software developer had some business sense, he would solicit those people to pay for the development of version 2.0. Come up with a list of feature enhancements, set a price to implement for each one, and then make sure that all the regular users of the software know that by paying up front, they can get their most desired features added to the next release.

Of course, if the guy doesn't have a clue about the internet, and is stuck in the old pre-network mindset, yeah, then there really is nothing he can do about the piracy and he might as well just give up. Eventually someone smarter will come along and exploit the opportunities the first guy could not.

Re:*sigh*

[xtracto]

Your hypothetical software developer is like the urbanite lost in the desert. If he knew how to take advantage of the situation, then he COULD do something about it. All those people who download and actually use the software - not the 99% who download it, play with it and then delete, but the people for whom it is actually useful - those people are potential customers for version 2.0.

Pretty much A solution to software piracy is software as a service. As a software developer I hate PHP, WebForms, AJAX, etc etc and think that lots of programs are better off the Web (as standalone applications), however I started to deploy all my software as web portals and charge subscription fees for it.

If you look at it, maybe it is one of the reasons why Microsoft and other big companies are planning to do that, no conspiracy or whatever.

Re:*sigh*

[okoskimi]

Oh, COME ON! Almost nobody would pay in advance for software, and those who would are the fraction-of-a-percent minority where an abundance of cash, a charitable mindset and idealism (or lack of realism) meet. Because:

• Although a great many people may post on forums how a feature is absolutely crucial, not many people are actually passionate enough to put their money where their mouth is. Ever done a software pilot with a partner company? If you don't charge for enhancements (non-bug-fix-changes) during the pilot, you will get a hundred enhancement requests, most of them "really important", and the requests don't ever stop. If you charge for the enhancements, you will get maybe two, and they will stop the second the software does its job even remotely adequately.
• The buy-a-feature process is too complex and difficult. You would have to really love the software to bother. Most people won't.
• Software development is by nature an uncertain business, and small-time developers even more so. Paying in advance carries a big risk of losing your money, and you have no way of knowing what you will really get (whereas normally sold software has practically always a demo).
• The number of people who pay is going to be small because of the previous points. Therefore the per-user cost will need to be high, or the total amount of money will be low which would further reduce the likelihood of the software getting finished. This will further drive down the number of users who are willing to pay.

In general, the whole attitude of "content creators should accept piracy and find other means of generating revenue" is horse manure. It is just saying that because something illegal is suddenly technically easy and difficult to prevent, it should be accepted. You cannot ban the software and machines used for the illegal activity because they have legitimate uses. Compare with guns: shooting somebody is technically easy and difficult to prevent, and we do not want to ban guns (as a society - at least yet). Yet we did not just resign ourselves to accepting murder, did we? (insert obligatory joke about US gun violence rates)

I have no sympathy for media companies that are ripping off artists and trying to charge you multiple times for the same content. But neither do I think that it is your god-given right to freely enjoy the fruits of other people's labor.

But since this is turning into a rant, and those are rarely productive, here's my suggestion: Integrate the application with a server-side service that requires the application to log in to your server. You have to maintain your own server then but should be feasible for a small user base. Then you can keep track of the paid accounts and kill the compromised ones. The server-side thing should be important enough though that pirates don't just cut out that part from the application (or so intertwined with how the application operates that cutting it out is not feasible).

If you can't do that, then the only alternatives I see are either making such a niche application that the pirates don't bother (but then your application has to be best-in-class because market is so small), or focusing your application on people who aren't likely to pirate it (business and security applications, applications for novice users).

Finally - always make sure it is really easy to find and buy your application legitimately. People often are on the fence about whether to pay for it or not. A less-than-easy buying process will convince them not to pay (and probably pirate it and feel righteous about it...).

Re:*sigh*

[suv4x4]

I'm always bothered when I read articles like this because I know the Slashdot party line is always "File sharing good, fuck the content creators". I get upset because I think of my little brother, who's basically been screwed by piracy.

My little brother has a band. The music is quite good. The band is quite popular locally. It's so popular, in fact, that people bootleg their music and share it across the internet.

At first they were quite happy about this. They were reaching a much larger audience. Surely these people will come to their concerts and buy their CDs if they like the music (at least, that's what Slashdot always says will happen).

However, it didn't. Turns out (from conversations with their fans on their message board) that no one wants to buy their music. They like it, but hwy buy the music when fans can download every one of their albums for free online?

Did your brother bother making it easy to buy his music? Is it available on eMusic, iTunes, on his own band site (does he have one, what is it?). Does he advertise his art online and does he sell signed CD-s on his live performances?

Making money as an artist is a lot, lot more than making good art.

Of course, Pirate Byran's hypocricy is astounding - they're building very hot business around content piracy. Apparently if everyone shared their ideology, the very content they make money off wouldn't have existed, or would be easily accessible via other channels. They would be broke then.

But my post isn't about those losers, its about your brother who you believe has the automatic right to profit from making good music, and if he doesn't, it's others to blame. Art is a business like any else, the moment you want to profit from it. Same rules apply. Nothing works magically in business.

Re:*sigh*

[gsslay]

- those people are potential customers for version 2.0.

They all clearly need the software, they probably all have ideas about how it could be improved. If this hypothetical software developer had some business sense, he would solicit those people to pay for the development of version 2.0. Come up with a list of feature enhancements, set a price to implement for each one, and then make sure that all the regular users of the software know that by paying up front, they can get their most desired features added to the next release. At which point these people say "No thanks, we'll wait and take version 2.0 for free off Pirate Bay, just like we took version 1.0."

The argument you're using here is a common one on slashdot. "Yeah they're not getting paid for their work, and everyone is taking it for free. But think of the good publicity and all the money they'll make later on." Well here's news; "later on" is now, and everyone is still taking their work for free.

Re:Just happened to be browsing firehose...

[TheThiefMaster]

The "from its advertising" part makes it sound like a load of bs fud. So does the "up to".

Probably good to explain.

[Futurepower(R)]

Not everyone knows what PirateBay, Suprnova, Mininova, IsoHunt, and Demonoid do. I think it would be good to explain their purpose and their differences.

Other questions: Why does Demonoid have accounts? "People in the United States downloading torrents tracked on The Pirate Bay are certainly in danger." Why is that? What is PeerGuardian? What is MediaSentry?

For those who are tempted, please skip any negative comments. No one can know everything about computers.

Re:Probably good to explain.

[originalnih]

I don't think Demonoid's account restrictions have anything to do with user security. It's far more related to torrent quality. Upload a virus? Bam! You're out. Upload a fake? More bam! You're out.

The Demonoid folk make an effort to report torrents that work well too, meaning you can read in a torrent's comments to find missing files, cracks, serials, links to better torrents, etc.

Any effort I make to learn a new piece of software is often an impulse so I have to acquire that software fast. So thanks Demonoid, you've kept me educated. In turn I've purchased the software I've learnt to use. I don't think anyone at this point realistically argues that there's no place for piracy.

Re:Just happened to be browsing firehose...

[gaspyy]

I wonder if that's true? The "from its advertising" part makes it sound like a load of bs fud.

It's hard to impossible to verify the accuracy of this claim - but it's not "bullshit" or "FUD".

I've disabled by AdBlock just to see their pages... they have FIVE ad areas (can't call them banners) as follows:

• Top right - Auction Ads;
• Top center - TargetPoint;
• Left - AdultFriendFinder;
• Right - AdBrite;
• Bottom - Auction Ads.

I don't know about their daily impressions, click-through ratio, but they certainly get more than 1000 EUR/day from ads, and the 20,000 EUR figure doesn't seems far-fetched to me.

I won't get sucked into moral or political discussions, but anyone who thinks that they (and others) are in just for fun, are simply naïve.

Cry me a river.

[Anonymous Coward]

Where exactly is it written that your little brother (lets pretend I believe your story for a second) has the right to make a living by making music?

Lots of proffesions have seen their livelyhood dry up because of a changing world. I am originally trained as a baker and I used to be pretty good too. However the increasing shift in holland for people to get their bread and similar products from the supermarket (factory) means there is less and less business from small bakers.

Worse, laws about noise pollution (bakeries work at night in the center of towns) and such have made it impossible to open a new business.

So will you heart bleed for me? Should people be forced to change their basic nature (go for the cheap easy solution) and be forced to buy their bread seperate at a local bakery?

I happen to know two people involved in music. One is Henk, the zingende schilder. Never heard of him? Offcourse not, he is extremely local but he likes singing, he is very good at it. No he won't ever get rich of it but who says he should?

Another guy I know is heavily into experimental music, the type of music were you read that a new band has launched a new cd with a whopping 10 copies, and some are still available. If you see the included list of rental prices for equipment it is very easy to see most of these bands are PAYING to play their music. (And if you ever heard it, you might think they could never pay enough to be allowed to play it).

BUT they still play because they love their music, even if nobody else does.

Another friend is a soccar player, not a bad one either apparently, can he blame the current system of soccer of hiring foreigners for not giving him a chance to play commercially?

NO.

It is idiotic that you seem to think that you are entitled to make a living with your hobby. There are plenty of other hobbies that cost a lot more were people work long hours to be able to do the stuff they really want to be payed for if they could.

Race teams that slave the whole week to put their car in the race would LOVE to be picked by a big sponsor.

No your "little brother" does NOT deserve sympathy. If he doesn't like it, he can quit and get a real job. Else he must simply accept that for most bands the music will never be their day job.

Speaking as one of the billions working a regular boring day job, I can't bring itup to give a damn.

Re:Not a bad idea

[Captain Splendid]

but the symbolic meaning is, IMHO, actually important.

Exactly right. There's little need for another torrent site, but the psychological impact is huge. That's what I love about the Pirate Bay guys. Love 'em or hate 'em, they certainly have a talent for harnessing drama.

Re:Who needs it

[AnonChef]

Private sites with ratios are in my experience not worth the effort.
Quite frankly I get better transfer speeds from the public torrents. When it comes to torrents, the more peers the better.
Private sites have their place. Especially sites with narrow content. In many cases transfer speed is not an issue, finding the stuff at all is often enough. Ratio is just a way to try to ensure some modicum of "play nice" among members for those places. With the grace period most have "hit and run" members are a problem even then.