Slashdot Mirror


MPAA Scores First P2P Jury Conviction

An anonymous reader writes "The MPAA must be celebrating. According to the BitTorrent news site Slyck.com, the Department of Justice is proclaiming their first P2P criminal copyright conviction, against an Elite Torrents administrator. The press release notes, 'The jury was presented with evidence that Dove was an administrator of a small group of Elite Torrents members known as "Uploaders," who were responsible for supplying pirated content to the group. At sentencing, which is scheduled for Sept. 9, 2008, Dove faces a maximum sentence of 10 years in prison.'"

20 of 335 comments (clear)

  1. Insanity by aztektum · · Score: 5, Insightful

    10 years in prison? I realize that's a maximum, but the reality is he's done nothing that should be even closely considered to being a danger to society.

    This hangup about defending our bullshit economy which truly only services the "haves" in the first place is being taken to extremes and I'm getting tired of it.

    I say pirate everything, convince your friends, family, etc. Let's see what they do when EVERYONE is downloading their shit. Are they going to throw us all in jail? Then where will they be?

    Fuckers.

    --
    :: aztek ::
    No sig for you!!
    1. Re:Insanity by EdIII · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I can see how you got the flambait mod, mainly for the last sentence.

      However, you do have a valid point about just what danger to society this person poses and whether or not 10 years is a punishment that fits the crime.

      It would certainly seem that the powerful in this country are pushing for stronger and stronger criminal punishments for what would otherwise be a civil matter between 2 entities.

    2. Re:Insanity by Cocoshimmy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I totally agree, the punishment does not fit the crime. 10 years in prison should be reserved for things like rape, manslaughter, assault with a deadly weapon and other crimes of similar severity. Music/Movie/Software piracy should not be put in the same category.

    3. Re:Insanity by dreamchaser · · Score: 5, Insightful

      A stiff fine would seem to be in order, and civil damages. Jail time is pretty harsh for this kind of IP crime though.

    4. Re:Insanity by dreamchaser · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Well, if someone steals the secret designs for the new Widget(tm) that a company has then they should get jail time and that is an IP crime, although you could argue it's industrial espionage. We agree on this matter though. I would think probation would be enough even (plus a fine), not even six months. Six months in jail can totally ruin a person's life, whereas if they get probation they might just be able to keep their job/house, etc.

    5. Re:Insanity by Mr2001 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      But anything large-scale that isn't infrastructural (meaning recreational software) is going to essentially die in your sick little fantasyland.

      No, it'll just need to be paid for differently: by charging for the programmers' labor instead of charging for copies of the files they produce.

      How dare those people expect to make a living out of their work. It should all be free for you to use, and god [i]damn[/i] the whole "making enough money to eat" thing.

      More like god damn the people who are too blind, or too attached to a broken business model, to realize that you don't need copyright to get paid for working. People in most other industries manage to get paid for their work without any special monopoly protections like copyright.

      You tell those "fucking GNUtards" to "get a job in the real world", but maybe you should follow that advice yourself. You'll find that in the real world (i.e. industries that haven't become addicted to copyright), people don't do the work first, for free, and then spend months or years trying to get people to pay them for the work they've already done. They find customers first, and do the work once those customers have agreed to pay them for it.

      Or is it just that now they've [i]already[/i] made the games, it's okay in your entitlement-based mind to say "oh, fuck you, we're going to take it and make it free for everyone, and too bad for you if you relied on it for income"?

      If your income depends on people not being allowed to share information with each other, then you're doing it wrong.

      --
      Visual IRC: Fast. Powerful. Free.
    6. Re:Insanity by Dan541 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It's easy to forget that. I'm all for the death penalty and harsh criminal convictions, but only for violent crime. IP infringement is not a crime that we need to take 10 years from somebody for. Let's not forget that we will spend anywhere between 300K and 400K as taxpayers to do it too. Is is really that cost effective for us to do this? To protect big media companies? To protect society, or our values?

      Copyright laws have a huge cost to society, I think they should be abolished then we wouldn't have to deal with this crap.

      --
      An SQL query goes to a bar, walks up to a table and asks, "Mind if I join you?"
    7. Re:Insanity by deimtee · · Score: 5, Insightful

      They don't want nasty violent people in there, they want nice malleable workers who will do what they are told because they are too shit scared to move. You know, white colar recreational drug users.

      --
      I'm guessing that wasn't on their radar screen...
    8. Re:Insanity by clang_jangle · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Maybe we should just build Imaginary Prisons for those who "steal" Imaginary Property? Then the punishment could truly fit the crime. :)

      --
      Caveat Utilitor
    9. Re:Insanity by suck_burners_rice · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Ok let's think about this. What was the Constitution and the Bill of Rights supposed to defend? Your rights, right? Ok, now that we've established that, from whom is this Bill of Rights defending you, the individual? Mainly from the government. Now you need to realize that the government is not some ephemeral entity that determines the order of the universe. It's a bunch of dudes who happened to get elected and happen, therefore, to have power to make things happen. It is from THOSE DUDES that the Bill of Rights is supposed to protect you. Unfortunately, the Bill of Rights is only a piece of paper. It is YOU who must always monitor what is happening and to fight violations of your rights. I believe that in that Bill of Rights somewhere, it says something to the effect that:

      Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

      Now don't you think that getting the kind of sentence that a rapist might get is a tad bit CRUEL AND UNUSUAL for downloading or uploading some worthless garbage?

      --
      McCain/Palin '08. Now THAT's hope and change!
    10. Re:Insanity by Dun+Malg · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Ever hear of Tower Records? What happened to them? What happened to most of their big competitors? They've pretty much vanished within the last ten years, didn't they?

      Wal-Mart happened to the big record chains. Tower and all those other bastards sold CDs at list price. Tower also expanded over aggressively in the 90's. High-volume, low-margin discount sellers is what killed the record chains, not piracy.

      --
      If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
  2. It might be a good idea... by deft · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ...to NOT name your group on a torrent site something that allows information about structure to be gleaned.

    Sure, uploaders may be only uploading only legal content blah blah blah, but there's no reason to publicize your role in the organization unless you can sure as hell sheild yourself while these lawsuits are bounding about.

    Even the mob knows to call people "freinds of ours", not money launderers, assasins, gun runners etc. Please don't flame me because this is "security through obscurity".... because sometimes it works i.e, I still don't know where angelina jolie lives. Well played angelina, you hot little baby collector.

    --

    There's nothing Intelligent about Intelligent Design.
    1. Re:It might be a good idea... by xx_toran_xx · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "Security through obscurity" is what can sometimes make or break a lawsuit. The ability of a juror to make the connection between what a website might call an "content administration officer" and that user's actual role is what is at stake. The obscurity in a title like that leaves their role at the website open for interpretation. Obviously the plaintiff (MPAA) would argue it for uploader, but the defendent could argue it another way.

      --
      Arrrrrrr
  3. NOT P2P by EdIII · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You gotta love these people. They are trying to make it sound like P2P itself is criminal, or certainly criminal by association.

    This piracy group merely chose P2P as a medium to transfer it's files.

    That would be like government catching a bunch of whatchamacallit smugglers on bicycles and then announcing "the first bicycle whatchamacallit criminal conviction". Ummm, yeah right. What the hell does bicycles have to do it?

    It's not surprising that piracy groups have chose P2P to transfer their files. It is most efficient transfer medium with the highest market share. It used to IRC DCC transfer, and then before that it was FTP. A long time before that, it was file transfers through BBS. Bootleg copies used to be made on cassette tapes as well. Did that mean cassette tapes were also inherently "evil" and predisposed towards piracy? I think not.

    Sorry, I guess I just can't get over how completely full of shit some people are. We can argue about piracy and intellectual copyrights all day long. That's fine. Let's just not be intellectually dishonest doing it.

  4. Re:Not "really" P2P by LostCluster · · Score: 4, Insightful

    In other words... these guys were using P2P at the technical level, but they were really doing the uploading of the content. **AA has a long win streak against uploaders, it's downloaders that they've had so much problems with.

  5. Worst idea evar!!!!! by TiggertheMad · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Despite how bad it may sound, this is more or less not a big deal for the average person. It is like video game companies going after people who host ROMs of copyrighted games... Not that bad. Now if they won for a downloader or innocent uploader... That would be different.

    No this is horribly bad. First, it is a basic travesty of justice. Prison time for P2P? Unless he was putting nuclear weapon designs on P2P, there is no reason for this. lets put people in jail for twenty years if they steal a loaf of bread. That's progressive thinking!

    Second, the legal system loves basing later decisions on prior landmark cases. this has just told every judge for the next fifty years that criminal punishment id ok for civil infractions.

    Third, the economy is in the dumps, and every peerson we imprision for piddly ass crap like this is costing taxpayers $$$. Ten years is not cheap. The people responsable should be dragged into the street and tarred and feathered for such frivilious use of taxpayer money.

    Finally, bad laws erode respect for good laws. The more people become acoustom to breaking laws that are poorly written, the more acoustom they become to breaking laws in general.

    Very bad ruling.

    --

    HA! I just wasted some of your bandwidth with a frivolous sig!
  6. Re:Those types of people legitimise the MPAA effor by adminstring · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If you'd like to come over with your car-duplicating equipment and make an exact copy of my Ferrari without damaging it, you're welcome to do so.

    :-)

    --
    My truck is like a series of tubes.
  7. Re:10 years? Please USA, get a grip by fnj · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It's the maximum sentence, dumbass.

    You're the dumbass. It's immoral, stupid, hateful, vindictive, corrupt, and absurd to even have the option for a penalty this severe in a case like this. Under any sane legal system, this would be a CIVIL case, not a criminal one.

    Death was "only the maximum" sentence for witchcraft too at one time, dumbass.

    Excuse the language, guys, but I'm replying to a witless anonymous coward. Anything goes in this case.

  8. 10 years? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    So, some pirates can get 10 years, yet we have Massachusetts' representative James Fagan calling a 10 year mandatory sentence for 3 time offending child predators 'draconian'. Ridiculous.

    -Bradley H.

  9. Re:Intellectuals by Dan541 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I agree,

    Theft of imaginary property should be served in an imaginary jail.

    --
    An SQL query goes to a bar, walks up to a table and asks, "Mind if I join you?"