Slashdot Mirror
MPAA Seeks $15 Million From The Pirate Bay
praps writes "Having tasted blood with its victory over TorrentSpy, the MPAA is now stepping up its attack on The Pirate Bay. The association is claiming damages of over $15 million, based on The Pirate Bay's distribution of four films and a TV series — Harry Potter, The Pink Panther, Syriana, Walk the Line and the first season of Prison Break. The Swedish court is unlikely to be as generous as the one in California, although the four Pirate Bay founders are already facing charges of being accessories to breaking copyright law."
TorrentSpy, in the meantime, has declined to pay the settlement awarded to the MPAA on Wednesday. In addition to appealing the decision, they have filed for bankruptcy.
TorrentSpy's big problem was the destruction of evidence.
http://www.google.com/search?q=torrentspy+destruction+of+evidence
Once they did that, the Judge essentially said "we can't have a real trial, you're guilty"
No legal precedent was set in the TorrentSpy case, because no legal analysis of any copyright claims happened.
[Fuck Beta]
o0t!
I'm puzzled about whether the pirate bay guys are just attention seekers, or if they are actually willing to potentially screw up the rest of their lives for this cause.
They must have seen it coming and they've had a lot of time to back down.
Either way, big balls.
Does it gain a lot of money from its site ? How many millions do they get from ads and such ? Can the court force them to publish the real numbers ? Or will its fortune stay secret ?
Or does it gain nothing at all (really no profit) from their activities ?
-- Rastignac was here.
Just to point out:
:) )
We are not "the consumer". We are nerds who participate in friendly discussion on an Internet News Site. That means that we are just a tiny, microscopic fraction of all consumers everywhere (or, in this case, in the US) and, as such, have no power over the rest of the consumers. Thus, preaching like "Vote with your wallets!" HERE will not accomplish anything - we already know this (though most of us probably don't care). The only thing we CAN do is raise awareness - and somehow, I don't see any big protest signs on the streets criticising MAFIAA for their actions.
To sum it up: Why don't we actually DO something about it, not stand idle and repeat the old phrases that every one of us heard a dozen times?
(Reply: The sun. IT BURNS USSSS!
"We are the music makers, and we are the dreamers of dreams [...]."
Sending legal threats to the Pirate Bay, MPAA? Yeah, how's that working out for you?
UTF-8: There and Back Again
The MPAA does not differ between downloads from Sweden and from abroad, which I think is not going to fly well with the court. Unlike US courts that (apparently) doesn't care about things like national jurisdiction, Swedish courts do (at least I hope so).
/ The Arrow
"How lovely you are. So lovely in my straightjacket..." - Nny
Really, I don't give a damn either way. Pirate Bay is cocky and arrogant and makes money from other peoples work, and the movie industry is a cynical money grabbing cartel. I tolerate the Pirate bay because I like to get free stuff, and movie industry for the few decent films they actually do produce.
To quote Orwell, "The Proles will never revolt."
As long as we HAVE our X-Factor, our America's Next Top Model, our Pop Idol, and our never ending Lost series, we'll let them do whatever the fuck they want.
Bah... Baaaah...
Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
Now before you all go getting your panties in a bunch waffling on about Intellectual Property, multi million $ damages, legal technicalities blah, blah, blah... please remember one thing.
PyratByran is run by Swedes. Sweden is not part of the United States. Your silly American laws do not apply in Sweden.
I look forward to the usual barrel of laughs that will ensue.
That's a really idealized vision of the system.
Capitalism is a game in which buyers and sellers are oppenents.
Saying "the market decides" means that the power is all in the hands of the buyers: that's when you can say that "the market will make better products appear": better meaning better for the buyer. This is the ideology which justifies capitalism: the people are the buyers, and the law are (supposed to be) made for the people's sake.
But this is just one extreme in the balance of power between the two players; and just finding a good example for it is difficult. The best one is probably gas stations: you know exactly what you are buying, and you can easily check an other one, so the margins are (I guess) pretty low.
But in many cases, the balance weights heavily toward the seller. We all know the reasons: using people's mistakes (lottery, complicated billing), forced buying (bundling, etc), monopoly (or any alliance of sellers against buyers), control of the information, control of the law (lobbying).
All thoses are limitted or forbidden by the law, because they all go against the people's interest. Even marketing, when you think about it, is pretty absurd since it openly tries to make a deal seem better than it really is for buyer.
The only moral justification you can think of to allow marketing is that a company will only have the money to run ads if it is successful; this takes for granted that success is mostly the result of the company's real usefulness to the people.
In short, marketing is only justified if it does not change the relative success of companies!
(Note: you can't justify marketing just by freedom of speech, which is intended for cases when the law should stay neutral in the fight between two parties, as in a trial; there is no reason not to favor the people against the sellers. Except for international competitivity; it's often an easy excuse, but it's a valid point and a wider discussion).
Of course, the other cases (monopoly, bundling) are even harder to justify; but the worse is certainly lobbying. The simple idea that sellers could affect the law is utterly absurd, and lobbying is the best indicator of the power balance. In France -and I guess most countries- it's simply called corruption (which does not mean it doesn't happen).
And by the way: the internet has the potential to take a lot of power away from the sellers. Before Ebay, some companies made profit just by providing the organisation that buyers lacked.
Things can really change; that is, if we don't let them rewrite the laws too much with the power they have left.
1, 2, 3... Fight!
Don't take my posts literally; it's just code to control my botnet.
If by that you mean they sell advertising space because they are a popular indexing site, then how is that 'making money from other peoples work'?
It isn't, any more than Google providing a search service then selling advertising space is.
What strikes me is that the target market in the Pirate Bay's case is (according to the **AA spin) a bunch of freeloaders and pirates who won't pay for anything, so why would advertisers pay good money to access that market?
Obviously the users of the service must have some interest in purchasing whatever is advertised there - so there's a message for the **AA there somewhere :o).
One swallow does not a fellatrix make
Today on Big Brother: Winston finally comes to love Big Brother and then gets shot in the back of the head. The rest of the housemates fight over how to divvy up his possessions.
"It doesn't cost enough, and it makes too much sense."