Slashdot Mirror
The Pirate Bay — "Just a Very Large Hobby"
praps writes "In a fascinating interview with two of the founders of The Pirate Bay entitled 'Are they baby-eating monsters or what?,' Swedish news site The Local discovers that far from being the radical Robin Hoods of the digital age, Peter Sunde and Fredrik Neij are actually 'polite, humorous and down-to-earth.' They may run one of the biggest sites in the world but 'it's just a hobby that's grown to be very, very large.' Financially, they are 'happy as long as it doesn't make a loss,' and both hold down regular IT day jobs. And apparently they spend a lot of time with a Bedouin in the Sinai desert."
Peter Sunde and Fredrik Neij are actually 'polite, humorous and down-to-earth.'
And does this surprise anyone? I think most will find that most people that work in IT are this way. Sure there's the occasional elitist that likes to think their shit doesn't smell, but on the whole I'd say most people in IT are reasonable, easygoing people.
While I hate the **AA almost as much as the average Slashdotter, I'm feeling a bit uneasy by reading this kind of news. That's one thing to criticize the whole IP scam that companies are trying to bring down to our throats, but it's another thing to sanctify torrent sites and treat their owners as if they were part of some sort of Jet-Set. What's next ? A new about how mininova's top uploader got laid ? How can we be taken seriously when fighting against the copyright nazis with news like this ? On the other hand, most of the torrent sites I use where discovered by realing Slashdot :)
I hope you're a troll!
"Once defying the law becomes seen as just and right, fine distinctions like between a corrupt church official and an innocent child witness go out the window."
Can you site any cases outside mythology to support your determination that, say, Ghandi's independence movement in India, or the US civil rights movement or the UK nuclear disarmament movement of the 80's or the Aussie Franklin river protesters, or greenpeace, or even PETA, or the East Timorese movment of the 90's or the Tuianemen square victims or indeed ANY OTHER group who believed that the law was wrong .... ... have ever failed to make the distinction in question?
I can't!
Govt agencies don't count; they acknowledge the justness of the law, but either have immunity or just break it anyway.
M. East suicide bombers probably don't have the logistical and technical resources to target the officials they'd like to. Nor, it seems, do predator drones.
No, highly principled disobedience is certainly possible at any time, and is not too much to expect from anyone who claims to have free will. I think the men you describe are typical bad guys, and decided that any witness is one too many, and you're trying to extrapolate something more absolute from the tale, like trying to pull a length of piano wire from spaghetti.
The lesson you claim is false and dangerous, and you are actively undermining people's understanding of humanity, compassion and morality.
You realize the irony of this statement, right? Taken out if its anti-TPB rant, it quite easily applies to the Recording industry distributors. In fact, it almost better applies to them because TPB's so-called profits and effect on music sales are pretty questionable. Whereas the coercive and immoral contracts of the music distributors are widely accepted facts.
The Pirate Bay provides a very valuable service. It excels at displaying what an immoral farce copyright laws and globalization have become. It is a modern day speakeasy. The fact that they STILL (after years of press) get threatening DMCA requests, which do not and should not apply to them (being that they aren't subjects of the United States government) is very telling.
Blowback. If you clampdown too hard, people will resist. Hard enough, and they will revolt and maybe even seek revenge--justified or not. U.S. Copyright law has progressed far beyond its constitutional mandate. Article 1 section 8, clause 8 states the following: "To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries." And yet, "limited time" has come to mean 75 years AFTER the death of the author. There have been serious arguments made in on the congressional floor to construe "limited times" as infinity minus one day. In what reasonable way is that "limited"? Furthermore, there are countless examples where modern copyright and patent laws serve only to obstruct progress. Rarely do stated arguments even involve the actual mandate of patents and copyrights anymore. We speak in terms of losses to artists and inventors despite the fact that this is rarely ever the actual case (most copyrights and patents are held by multinational corporations) and not the intended focus of these protections.
"Intellectual Property" laws have become tools of oppression and exploitation. It should not be surprising that people are resisting them, even if such resistance has ulterior self-serving motive.
-Grym