Slashdot Mirror


Half the Charges Against Pirate Bay Dropped

eldavojohn writes "Half the charges have been dropped in the second day of the trial against the Pirate Bay. The charges dropped are those relating to 'assisting copyright infringement,' so the remaining charges are simply 'assisting making available.' No information on how this affects the size of the lawsuit or a settlement."

347 comments

  1. Making Available by techsoldaten · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Arguably, I make copyright infingement available by providing my daughter with a computer that can access the Internet.

    If the argument is that putting a site up that points at known torrents is a crime, doesn't every media outlet in the world carrying this story run the risk of some culpability by promoting it?

    M

    1. Re:Making Available by macx666 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The secret is journalism.

      If the Pirate Bay wrote a quick op-ed piece about every torrent they linked to, then they would be journalists and thus, protected. Next thing you know, they will be named thepiratebaytimes.org.

    2. Re:Making Available by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yeah, I was a little surprised to see the BBC story on the case linking directly to TPB. By the argument being used by the prosecutors and some interpretations of the DMCA, that's arguably facilitating copyright infringement too ...

    3. Re:Making Available by VJ42 · · Score: 5, Informative

      Sorry to piggyback on the FP, but for those of us at work with TFA blocked, here's the BBC's take: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7895026.stm

      --
      If I have nothing to hide, you have no reason to search me
    4. Re:Making Available by El+Lobo · · Score: 4, Interesting
      The real problem is that the attorney has shown zero, null, nada understanding about how the torrent protocol works. I just listened to the radio broadcast of the trial live from court and his speech was just a laughable 20 minutes talking full of technical non-sense.

      The guy just spoke about "IP numbers", "File distribution", etc without understanding the nature of the torrent distributed protocol. It's just incredible that the companies that are bringing TPB to court, with all their money and power couldn't find a more technical prepared lawyer (if there is such a thing)

      --
      It's time to realise that Abble's products are the biggest abomination these days. Just say NO to the dumb iAbble way!!
    5. Re:Making Available by techsoldaten · · Score: 5, Informative

      It's a prosecutor.

      The record labels do not choose their prosecutors, the state does. Keep in mind, attorneys tend to be type A personalities that seek challenges and glory in inordinate amounts.

      I am sure there was some jockeying for the person who will handle this case, someone won, and he is doing it because he knew how to handle the politics moreso than because of his technology background.

      It was mentioned yesterday that the prosecutor claimed to be a computer crimes expert, but that he could not get a powerpoint presentation to operate on his laptop.

      M

    6. Re:Making Available by tepples · · Score: 1

      If the Pirate Bay wrote a quick op-ed piece about every torrent they linked to, then they would be journalists and thus, protected.

      But who's going to have the time to write reviews of so many feature films and their respective encode jobs?

    7. Re:Making Available by zappepcs · · Score: 5, Informative

      ....It's just incredible that the companies that are bringing TPB to court, with all their money and power couldn't find a more technical prepared lawyer (if there is such a thing)

      Of course there are technically prepared lawyers! Ye gods man! See my sig

    8. Re:Making Available by pdabbadabba · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I don't know anything about the actual Swedish laws in play here, but it seems to me that yours is just the usual, unpersuasive argument from vagueness. Clearly, both the Pirate Bay and, say, Slashdot are aiding in the making available of copyrighted works. The difference, of course, is of degree.

      The Pirate Bay makes it a core objective to assist in making copyrighted files available. (Just look at their name!) When they assist in making the files available, they do it deliberately and for its own sake.*

      Slashdot, by contrast, aids in making available to a much smaller degree and only incidentally while pursuing journalistic (-ish) ends.

      "The fact of twilight does not mean you cannot tell day from night." - Samuel Johnson

      *Of course, none of this should be read as suggesting that I think that "assisting making available" should be a crime...or whatever it is under Swedish law.

    9. Re:Making Available by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      www.rlslog.net is the answer to your question :)

    10. Re:Making Available by OECD · · Score: 5, Funny

      If the Pirate Bay wrote a quick op-ed piece about every torrent they linked to, then they would be journalists and thus, protected.

      But who's going to have the time to write reviews of so many feature films and their respective encode jobs?

      If only they could harness some sort of free labor pool...

      --
      One man's -1 Flamebait is another man's +5 Funny.
    11. Re:Making Available by Lachlan+Hunt · · Score: 1

      If the argument is that putting a site up that points at known torrents is a crime, doesn't every media outlet in the world carrying this story run the risk of some culpability by promoting it?

      That seems to be a non-sequitur. How does simply reporting on this court case relate to promoting piracy?

      --
      By reading this signature, you hereby agree with the content of the above comment.
    12. Re:Making Available by jgtg32a · · Score: 1

      Isn't that what the comments are for?

    13. Re:Making Available by tiananmen+tank+man · · Score: 1

      woosh? I believe the GP poster is refering to the .nfo files that are written up with ever single movie and game release

    14. Re:Making Available by Tacvek · · Score: 1

      Well, Beckerman may be far more techincally inclined than most lawyers, He still is not quite the technology person most other Slashdot posters are. His blog's main page makes that clear, although he freely admits that it is not as nice as he would like it to be.

      I also find it kind of disturbing that he claims the Paypay invoice form looks like a check. It looks like an invoice form to me, albeit an unusual one, since the person paying is allowed to specify the dollar amount. I also find it a bit disturbing that the line item is for "Legal Services". I'm no lawyer, but it seems to me that giving money to a lawyer for unspecified legal services is the sort of thing that could create an attorney-client relationship. (If it were listed for specific legal services provided to a third party, that would clear that up). I'm just guessing that he has it set up like that for some obscure legal reasons, quite likely accounting or tax reasons. (In my opinion, accounting law/regulkations comes in a close second for most screwed up laws. The Tax code comes in first. Next up is securities laws/regulations.)

      --
      Stylish sheet to fix many problems in Slashdot's D3: https://gist.github.com/801524
    15. Re:Making Available by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You could also say that Google is doing such things as well.

      You can do many things through Google:
      - links to download nudes of minors? check
      - links to download illegal copies of music? check
      - movies? same
      - games? same
      Etc

      They have no grounds on which to sue TPB, they lost.

      Maybe we should just hit the Off switch to the internets and call it a day.
      Not as if it is hard to kill the internet these days... so much for surviving nuclear war.

    16. Re:Making Available by somenickname · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Strange. At the end of the article, the BBC actually presented information that made it seem as if they actually understood what The Pirate Bay does. Either the author of the article asked his IT guys to explain it to him or he knows what it does because he uses it to download copyrighted material. Either scenario is amusing I suppose.

    17. Re:Making Available by bentcd · · Score: 5, Funny

      Here's an excerpt from the BBC article for the benefit of the cynics among us who know the media never gets technical matters right:

      BitTorrent is a legal application used by many file-shares to swap content because of the fast and efficient manner it distributes files.
      No copyright content is hosted on The Pirate Bay's web servers; instead the site hosts "torrent" links to TV, film and music files held on its users computers.

      There may be hope for the world yet :-)

      --
      sigs are hazardous to your health
    18. Re:Making Available by zappepcs · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Actually, I believe that if you consult with a lawyer for information or advice, about the courts or the law, it is a legal service. This is just and right. If you consult with a doctor for information about medicine, diseases, or other such, it is medical services.

      lawyers are meant to know the law, not be ambidextrous with writing HTML. In respect of a technical lawyer Beckerman's site is a great reference to legal issues regarding the RIAA and lawyers who know their stuff in court.

      In terms of a car analogy: You want a car driver that can not only not be confused by a mechanic, but can hold discourse with a mechanic at a level far beyond your own capabilities. It does not matter if the driver can rebuild an engine or not. His job is not building engines, but driving cars.

      So, in defense of RB's website, it's not as good as it could be but it still performs the intended purpose, and in doing so exposes you and I and everyone to great legal information. Most of us call this a legal service.

    19. Re:Making Available by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i suppose it would not be prudent for them to post a mocking of the prosecutor on the Legal Threats page. What i have learned is that when most of these people go after them they go off half-cocked and Judges don't usually like someone who's case is half shit.

    20. Re:Making Available by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      You beat me to it. Plus, if you read the .nfo files and the comments attached to the torrents, you'll often get some, er, interesting reviews of the various releases.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    21. Re:Making Available by Kozz · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Strange. At the end of the article, the BBC actually presented information that made it seem as if they actually understood what The Pirate Bay does. Either the author of the article asked his IT guys to explain it to him or he knows what it does because he uses it to download copyrighted material. Either scenario is amusing I suppose.

      Quite the dichotomy you've presented. But is it outside the realm of possibility that the reporter actually already knew how bit torrent worked or otherwise decided to look it up in order to compose an informed article?

      --
      I only post comments when someone on the internet is wrong.
    22. Re:Making Available by PopeRatzo · · Score: 4, Funny

      Shit, I'll have you know the author of the article sometimes goes by the name "AXX0".

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    23. Re:Making Available by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He uses Open Office at work, you insensitive clod!

    24. Re:Making Available by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Well you see, for normal people like the person who wrote the article such insane bullshit isn't seriously considered. It may not even have occured to them.

    25. Re:Making Available by horza · · Score: 3, Funny

      A screenscraper pointed at the imdb forums, a random number generator, and a thesaurus should do the trick?

      Phillip.

    26. Re:Making Available by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The sad part is that investigators and police worked for 2 (TWO) years in gathering evidence and stuff only to have half of it dropped in the second day of the trial.

      Why should the public pay for the police hours and lawyer costs for such "political" trials?

    27. Re:Making Available by xelah · · Score: 5, Funny

      It was mentioned yesterday that the prosecutor claimed to be a computer crimes expert, but that he could not get a powerpoint presentation to operate on his laptop.

      That's because using a Powerpoint presentation on someone isn't a computer crime, it's a common assault.

    28. Re:Making Available by Anonymous+Cowpat · · Score: 4, Insightful

      they could argue it, but do you really think that an organisation the size of the BBC doesn't have some pretty rabid lawyers of its own?

      --
      FGD 135
    29. Re:Making Available by nicodoggie · · Score: 1

      Heh, no intelligent, well-informed lawyer with enough moral fiber in his body would take the case (I hope).

    30. Re:Making Available by apostrophesemicolon · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I currently have mod points. I could've just mod you down for "stupid", or "clueless". Both options aren't available, and "overrated" is not satisfying enough.

      So I figured I'd just post to point out what the above posts were trying to say is that..

      (oh screw it you can't be helped)

    31. Re:Making Available by mrclisdue · · Score: 2, Interesting

      If Mr. Beckerman decided to change his website, I, for one, would stop visiting, as it would be apparent to me that he has started listening to us assholes, rather than concentrate on righting the wrong that is 'IP'.

      cheers,

    32. Re:Making Available by Hurricane78 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      That's easy, if you use a computer. I mean use. Not click and play.

      See, computers are machines made for automation.

      q.e.d.

      --
      Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
    33. Re:Making Available by RabidMoose · · Score: 1

      Hear that sound, like a far-off "woosh"-ing?

    34. Re:Making Available by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It was mentioned yesterday that the prosecutor claimed to be a computer crimes expert, but that he could not get a powerpoint presentation to operate on his laptop.

      In his meager defense, he may be an expert in computer crime law, not computers per se.

      Yeah, I know, if he really wanted to be an expert in computer crime, he'd learn more about computers as well.

    35. Re:Making Available by taoye · · Score: 0

      You're not suggesting that journalists actually do this "research" stuff and produce "informed articles" now are you???

    36. Re:Making Available by fluffykitty1234 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You know, it's kind of funny. At this point they are trying to make a moral case for this: Giving people the tools to infringe copyright is wrong.

      But in countries like the USA their are companies that sell guns (locally and abroad, even sold them to the evil taliban). People will stand up and shout "guns don't kill people, people kill people." Well I say selling guns is more morally objectionable than providing a tool to allow copyright infringement. Torrents don't infringe, people infringe! Err, something like that.

    37. Re:Making Available by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Surely you jest. Bittorrent has a huge number of legit uses - there may be a few pirates about giving it a bad name, but I for one use TPB exclusively for HD documentaries.

      Yours truly,
      aXXo

    38. Re:Making Available by djonsson · · Score: 1

      Well, that would make sense. However, he's the specially appointed IT crime prosecutor, so this is supposed to be his field of expertise.

    39. Re:Making Available by mstahl · · Score: 3, Insightful

      What about a review site that just so happens to have links to the torrents being reviewed? The very notion that it might be open to such a stupid loophole is a good indication that the assisting making available charge is just a little ludicrous.

    40. Re:Making Available by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "clean of spam and other vandalism"

      IS that a prerequisite for journalism?

    41. Re:Making Available by Kjella · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Or they have someone on staff that's under 30, or they have someone on staff that has teenage kids, or... I found this PDF which says 70% recent internet users * 12% P2P users = 8.4% filesharers in the UK. If you took out small children and the elderly from that you'd be way into double digits. It's probably more getting to the point where you need a show of hands rather than call someone up from the IT department.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    42. Re:Making Available by Zerth · · Score: 1

      Who cares if it has spam and vandalism, no-one will read it. It's just there to keep away the lawyers.

    43. Re:Making Available by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Google provides links to pirated material. So if TPB looses is google next on the list. i like to see this.

    44. Re:Making Available by Fear13ss · · Score: 0, Redundant

      In the defense of TPB and "Making Available". Google makes available majority of the internet, including pages with questionable content. When do we get to take them to court? I mean how many users have received a virus from a bad search term and not properly screening the results... in fact, without google would the RIAA even know of TPB? would half the users? lets stop wasting time and take the one really responsible to court. I kid, and I like Google. I just think that the time wasted could be better spent. RIAA, you dropped the ball, what we have here is a FAILURE to INNOVATE. Someone is getting the job done for you, because we are tired of waiting. I still am willing to bet that I go buy a CD from Best Buy and it still lacks that technology from 1996, CD-Text. Every CD I own had to be copied to add that data, thanks Nero!

    45. Re:Making Available by jamstar7 · · Score: 1

      If the argument is that putting a site up that points at known torrents is a crime, doesn't every media outlet in the world carrying this story run the risk of some culpability by promoting it?

      Pretty much yeah, I'd think.

      By the same token, if I lend one of my legally owned dvds that I bought to a buddy of mine and he ripped it down to an AVI, made a torrent for it, and posted that on the net, in theory, they could hold me 'guilty' of 'making available for infringement', particularly if my pockets were deeper than the guy who posts the torrent.

      --
      Understanding the scope of the problem is the first step on the path to true panic.
    46. Re:Making Available by kimvette · · Score: 5, Funny

      So it would go like this:

      "This just in, user anonymous coward just posted a torrent [ ref: http://www.thepiratebaytimes.org/AdobeCS4-Windows/.torrent ] of Adobe Creative Suite 4. They were so bold they included a serial generator and an activation crack.

      Now, while we at thepiratebaytimes.org do not condone nor encourage piracy, in the interest of investigative journalism we have downloaded the torrent and wish to report that not only are the crack and serial generator fully functional, they do not install any malware on your system.

      It is the opinion of the editors at this media outlet that anonymous coward ought to be ashamed for himself by engaging in such willful promotion of copyright infringement. Shame on them, again, for posting the torrent at [ ref: http://www.thepiratebaytimes.org/AdobeCS4-Windows/.torrent ]. If you doubt our integrity and honesty we heartily encourage you to view the source [read: download the evidence] and test it for yourself.

      As always, we thank you for reading our news site and will be bringing you the latest news on alleged copyright infringement shortly."

      disclaimer for stupid sue-happy ambulance chasers: the links above are totally made up. If by freak chance they happen to link to infringing material, it is by sheer coincidence or the will of the LORD. I made the URL up based on the fake(?) domain referenced in the parent post.

      --
      The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
    47. Re:Making Available by oliderid · · Score: 1

      laughable 20 minutes talking full of technical non-sense

      "Big tubes with teleportation technologies digitalizing DVDs from one side and materializing them on the other side. They use water and its well known memory to generate under intense pressure torrents of data!"

    48. Re:Making Available by Zerth · · Score: 1

      The basis of the legal argument is the action of saying "that IP over there is either engaged in, or assisting in, the infringement of copyright" is a crime.

      By the media saying "hey, you can engage in the infringement of copyright at TPB", the media is then assisting in the infringement of copyright in a similar, if less automated, manner as TPB and thus subject to the same argument.

    49. Re:Making Available by jamstar7 · · Score: 1

      Maybe we should just hit the Off switch to the internets and call it a day.

      Wasn't there something here on /. the other day about the Powers That Seem To Be wanting to 'reboot the Internet' to make it 'safer'? From what I understand of the rantings on it, we'll eventually have to pay for every byte transfered through our computers...

      --
      Understanding the scope of the problem is the first step on the path to true panic.
    50. Re:Making Available by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      If the BBC author "knows what it does," he and other journalists would stop referring to Pirate Bay as a "file-sharing site." Use of that term is tantamount to referring to O.J. Simpson during his murder trial as "The murderer O.J. Simpson."

    51. Re:Making Available by Cyberax · · Score: 3, Funny

      Just wait until someone registers thepiratebaytimes.org and puts these torrents there :)

    52. Re:Making Available by bonch · · Score: 1

      If the argument is that putting a site up that points at known torrents is a crime, doesn't every media outlet in the world carrying this story run the risk of some culpability by promoting it?

      PirateBay doesn't "point at known torrents." It's the tracker that faciliates the downloads.

      Geez, pirates will go to extreme lengths to justify their piracy. Comparing a media outlet that runs this story to a torrent tracker server? Come on.

    53. Re:Making Available by Kjella · · Score: 4, Funny

      I for one use TPB exclusively for HD documentaries. Yours truly, aXXo

      I find your documentaries on modern popular culture intriguing and wish to subscribe to your newsletter.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    54. Re:Making Available by tepples · · Score: 1

      If the Pirate Bay wrote a quick op-ed piece about every torrent they linked to

      But who's going to have the time to write reviews

      That's easy, if you use a computer. I mean use. Not click and play.

      See, computers are machines made for automation.

      I always thought "op-ed" meant "opinion and editorial". How does one automate an opinion piece?

    55. Re:Making Available by jbssm · · Score: 1, Informative
      Actually not.

      Swedish law is quite different from USA law. Copyright only applies to creative works, a coment is not a creative work.

      In fact that is why they have (or had) this "legal section" in TPB were they published the letters sent by some USA companies threatening to sue them if they didn't stop hosting the torrent files to their works.

      In the USA you couldn't publish those letters since they could sue you for infringing copyright by publicizing what they wrote in it ... in Sweden ... well, as you see it's quite different.

    56. Re:Making Available by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      To take it a step further, isn't Sony, Pioneer, Denon, or any other manufacturer of a cassette tape deck "making copyright infringement available" by providing me with a means of copying a CD to cassette?

      How many mix tapes did you make in high school for friends or wouldbe girlfriends?

      -Coward

    57. Re:Making Available by hansamurai · · Score: 4, Funny

      Except no one reads the articles.

    58. Re:Making Available by ianare · · Score: 1

      Uhm this is BBC not Fox or CNN. They actually do some research on what they're writting.

    59. Re:Making Available by David+Gerard · · Score: 1

      The BBC? Yes.

      --
      http://rocknerd.co.uk
    60. Re:Making Available by DelgadoRandom · · Score: 1

      BBC's also on point on the legal analysis side: [http://www.newsy.com/videos/electronic_pirates_at_bay/] The quoted analogy to building a car that can exceed the speed limit and marketing it as "fast" is facile but effectively grounds and familiarizes a technology that IS unfamiliar to most people over 30. I'm uncertain as to the court system in Sweden, but if there are jurors, and they are over 30, that's going to help the defense immensely - especially since most people in that demographic aren't going to 'get' the humor in a group self-labeled as "Pirates" fighting what are essentially piracy charges. If these guys want to beat the corporations, they should get haircuts, buy some suits, and play the part of innovators in communication. They are just that, arguably, but they need to be recognized as such. This is a test case, but not really a legal one, it's more inter-generational values being brought into close proximity.

    61. Re:Making Available by ProfanityHead · · Score: 1

      Hmm, apparently your sarcasm/humor detection is a bit off today...

    62. Re:Making Available by halcyon1234 · · Score: 3, Funny

      They were fake domains when you posted them. But this is Slashdot, so fifteen seconds later, they because links to taster-domains hosting Goatse and pro-GNAA popups.

    63. Re:Making Available by ckuttruff · · Score: 1

      Who'd like to take bets as to whether that domain is actually registered by the end of the day.

      Disclaimer: The aforementioned "bet" is of the gentlemen's variety and in no way condones any illegal wager.

    64. Re:Making Available by EchaniDrgn · · Score: 1

      Great, you appear to have slashdotted that fine article. I keep on getting a DNS error when I try to go read it.

    65. Re:Making Available by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, there was and it was very disturbing how stupid some of the people "in control" are.

      Even if it were to happen, rogue networks would just end up popping up in more frequency around the world.

    66. Re:Making Available by JasterBobaMereel · · Score: 1

      Or maybe they are that rare beast an informed IT journalist (they do exist!) who uses BitTorrent for legitimate purposes and has used TPB to find them in the past ....

      There are (shock horror) links to *non-copyright*, Creative Commons, and GPL material on TPB as well as the vast amounts of copyright material ....

      --
      Puteulanus fenestra mortis
    67. Re:Making Available by HTH+NE1 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      If the Pirate Bay wrote a quick op-ed piece about every torrent they linked to

      But who's going to have the time to write reviews

      That's easy, if you use a computer. I mean use. Not click and play.

      See, computers are machines made for automation.

      I always thought "op-ed" meant "opinion and editorial". How does one automate an opinion piece?

      See Fox News.

      (News, Fox. News.)

      --
      Oh, say does that Star-Spangled Banner entwine / The myrtle of Venus with Bacchus's vine?
    68. Re:Making Available by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Working for the BBC, yeah. It's just all the "journalists" elsewhere that make it seem so rare. I remember hearing about press conference held by a group of anarchists who were organizing the RNC convention protests last year. The idiot journalists who were invited kept asking utterly ignorant questions, stuff that could have been answered by five minutes reading "anarchism" on wikipedia before showing up, wasting everyone's time. Eventually the BBC reporter got so fed up with trying to wade through these bozos to ask a useful question that he shouted something to the effect of "Christ! Don't any of you people do basic research before an event?"

    69. Re:Making Available by pipatron · · Score: 1

      This is why you should use example.org in all your examples.

      --
      c++; /* this makes c bigger but returns the old value */
    70. Re:Making Available by AnObfuscator · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If the BBC author "knows what it does," he and other journalists would stop referring to Pirate Bay as a "file-sharing site." Use of that term is tantamount to referring to O.J. Simpson during his murder trial as "The murderer O.J. Simpson."

      I disagree. Unlike murder, "file-sharing" is not inherently illegal. And TPB definitely allows the uploading and downloading -- i.e. "sharing" -- of .torrent files.

      --
      multifariam.net -- yet another nerd blog
    71. Re:Making Available by gravyleaves · · Score: 1

      I don't currently have mod points. I couldn't've just moded you down for "stupid", or "clueless". Both options aren't available, and "overrated" is not satisfying enough. So I figured I'd just post to point out what the above posts were trying to say is that.. (oh screw it you can't be helped)

    72. Re:Making Available by HTH+NE1 · · Score: 1

      To take it a step further, isn't Sony, Pioneer, Denon, or any other manufacturer of a cassette tape deck "making copyright infringement available" by providing me with a means of copying a CD to cassette?

      The makers of audio cassette recorders pay a royalty (bribe) to the regional recording industries for every unit sold in their region in exchange for not being sued.

      --
      Oh, say does that Star-Spangled Banner entwine / The myrtle of Venus with Bacchus's vine?
    73. Re:Making Available by Dragonslicer · · Score: 1

      How does one automate an opinion piece?

      A fork of SciGen, perhaps?

    74. Re:Making Available by noidentity · · Score: 1

      They could even institute a "community justice" system where after a suitable period (a fea years) and every community member has downloaded, examined the evidence to be sure it really is a working program without any problems, and judged it as infringing or not, a judgment is made, which could be posted.

    75. Re:Making Available by GodInHell · · Score: 1

      Ancient saying of the lawyer code: If the law is against you, argue the facts. If the facts are against you, argue the law. If both the law and the facts are against you, speak loudly and with great indignation. -GiH

    76. Re:Making Available by billcopc · · Score: 1

      You're either young or your memory's shoddy. When cassette decks came out, there was indeed a lot of legal finger-pointing over the copying aspect, same as when VHS and Beta became popular.

      Content "owners" will accuse anyone of anything, in order to protect their racket.

      --
      -Billco, Fnarg.com
    77. Re:Making Available by commodore64_love · · Score: 4, Insightful

      In my opinion, mod points are not intended to be used to express disagreement. I might say I like Macs, and you think Macs suck, so you're going to "-1" mod me? That's abuse of power, pure and simple. If you disagree with a person's comment, the proper response is not to mod them into invisibility.

      The proper response is to post a reply: "I disagree" and then explain why you disagree.

      Debate. Don't censor.

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
    78. Re:Making Available by eltaco · · Score: 1

      well, these guys are trying it; http://torrentfreak.com/avoid-downloading-fake-torrents-and-spam-with-vertor-081228/

      essentially they're downloading and checking every torrent on their tracker for fakes and drm riddled crap. I don't think it's such a stretch from your proposal.

      --
      It's not about fate, it's about character.
      there be no shelter here, the frontline is everywhere!
    79. Re:Making Available by fugue · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Why has it escaped everyone's notice that a computer quite trivially meets the definition of "Circumvention Device" under the DMCA? Of course, so does a brain. I kind of like the idea of suing everybody with a brain.

      Oh, wait. The DMCA doesn't apply outside the USA. Never mind.

      --
      "The biggest problem with communication is the illusion that it has taken place."
    80. Re:Making Available by TheNinjaroach · · Score: 2, Informative

      Debate. Don't censor.

      That pretty much sums up Slashdot's policy with mod points. Don't forget that moderator abuse can be stopped with metamoderation, try it out the next time you're offered.

      --
      I went to eat some animal crackers and the box said, "Do not eat if seal is broken." I opened the box and sure enough..
    81. Re:Making Available by SalaSSin · · Score: 1

      It is BBC, you know, they actually usually have informed articles, unlike some other newspapers of several western countries that i know and have read...

      But it does seem like the article as a bit biased in favor of TPB, actually...

      --
      Any sufficiently advanced incompetence is indistinguishable from malice - Grey's Law
    82. Re:Making Available by c4tp · · Score: 1

      But calling the defendants "The Pirate Bay" isn't in effect prejudicial? On the other hand, maybe the jury will all stop paying attention and start imagining Johnny Depp.

    83. Re:Making Available by houghi · · Score: 1

      Why the long article? They could just use your disclaimer.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    84. Re:Making Available by snaz555 · · Score: 1

      Mandatory car analogy: providing cars that can drive faster than any speed limit makes the car makers and sellers accomplices in every case of excessive speed. Especially sports cars and motorcycles - what purpose can they possibly have other than to break the law?!

      Of course, this is ridiculous - people who illegally share files are breaking the law, not the tool and community site vendors. The people who actually do break the law should get the equivalent of a $50 speeding ticket. It doesn't matter what the TPB calls itself, it's just a name and doesn't mean squat. The name Dodge Viper doesn't mean its purpose is to dodge law enforcement and send people to the hospital! It's simply a company and product name and they can call themselves and their products whateverthehell they wish. It doesn't prove intent of anything.

    85. Re:Making Available by SalaSSin · · Score: 1

      "with enough moral fiber in his body"

      We're talking about the same lawyers here, right...?

      --
      Any sufficiently advanced incompetence is indistinguishable from malice - Grey's Law
    86. Re:Making Available by Laglorden · · Score: 1

      Oh noes! Now the web sheriff is going to go after Slashdot too :(

    87. Re:Making Available by pureevilmatt · · Score: 1

      -1, Off Topic.

    88. Re:Making Available by Skal+Tura · · Score: 1

      They've started to filter torrent sites aswell?

      Just wonder how much does the company networks actually filter out ... It's not like they could stop anything, just waste productivity.

    89. Re:Making Available by Skal+Tura · · Score: 0

      yea, TFA is so F hard.

    90. Re:Making Available by Skal+Tura · · Score: 1

      This needs +10 funny.

    91. Re:Making Available by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes.

    92. Re:Making Available by Jardine · · Score: 1

      BitTorrent is a legal application used by many file-shares to swap content because of the fast and efficient manner it distributes files.
      No copyright content is hosted on The Pirate Bay's web servers; instead the site hosts "torrent" links to TV, film and music files held on its users computers.

      I keep seeing this phrase used and it strikes me as grammatically wrong. Shouldn't it be "copyrighted content"? Content can be copyrighted, but content can't be copyright.

    93. Re:Making Available by jroysdon · · Score: 1

      I'm not a lawyer and all that, but if someone emails or snailmails me a letter, addressed to me, I can do whatever I want with it, including buying a page in the newspaper to republish it or put it on my website.

      If the letter were not addressed to me, and I came across it by chance or accident, that wouldn't be legal.

    94. Re:Making Available by NoobixCube · · Score: 1

      That isn't actually as stupid as it sounds... A torrent site like that would be pretty good, I think. Sure, it wouldn't have the variety of most torrent sites, but you would at least get a small review on whatever you wanted to download.

      --
      Admit it. You post strawman arguments as AC so you get modded Insightful for refuting them, rather than Troll
    95. Re:Making Available by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Strange. At the end of the article, the BBC actually presented information that made it seem as if they actually understood what The Pirate Bay does. Either the author of the article asked his IT guys to explain it to him or he knows what it does because he uses it to download copyrighted material. Either scenario is amusing I suppose.

      Quite the dichotomy you've presented. But is it outside the realm of possibility that the reporter actually already knew how bit torrent worked or otherwise decided to look it up in order to compose an informed article?

      What? Media representatives who actually know what they fuck they are talking about? what are the odds?

    96. Re:Making Available by Thaelon · · Score: 1

      What's an articles?

      --

      Question everything

    97. Re:Making Available by coretx · · Score: 1

      or scnsrc.net if you dont like Martin who makes a profit out of it. Disgruntled rlslog authors started it after they found out that Martin was makeing a profit.

    98. Re:Making Available by Dun+Malg · · Score: 2, Informative

      Not if you're a "smart" mod and use Underrated/Overrated--- they aren't subject to metamoderation....

      --
      If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
    99. Re:Making Available by sumdumass · · Score: 1

      The easiest way to get around the under/over rated mod problem is to just reply to the down modded post. Wait a day or so before doing it, that way the troll will be out of points. Then just make some snide remark about how those mods simply don't stop the message from being seen. Someone will stumble along as long as you have good karma and be curious enough to see what was modded down. 9 out of 10 times (off the head calculations) your post will be modded back up and any negative karma will be neutralized. 9 out of 10 might be a little optimistic but I can say it would be more often then not.

      And of course, this is if your post isn't somehow deserving of the down mod. I fail to have every seen a need for the over rated though.

    100. Re:Making Available by GigaplexNZ · · Score: 1

      The proper response is to post a reply: "I disagree" and then explain why you disagree.

      Debate. Don't censor.

      And cancel out the other mod points already used in the current article? It's a shame that we can either moderate or comment, but not perform both.

    101. Re:Making Available by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I currently have mod points. I could've just mod you down for "stupid", or "clueless". Both options aren't available, and "overrated" is not satisfying enough.

      So I figured I'd just post to point out what the above posts were trying to say is that..

      (oh screw it you can't be helped)

      And if I had mod points I'd give you a nice "Whoooooosh" oh wait, I don't need points for that.

      here ya go, "Whoooooooooooooooooosh!!!"

      You are right, some people can't be helped, but I'll try.... the first parent to your post (and the other two parents) are making a joke-- all this is already on pirate bay. ie. reviews, free labor pool, and pages (more or less) free of spam.

    102. Re:Making Available by Raenex · · Score: 1

      I'm out of mod points. Otherwise I would have modded you "Overrated".

    103. Re:Making Available by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Suing everyone with a brain would not be as profitable as it may once have been. By your definition and my modification, I'm surrounded by people I can't sue.

    104. Re:Making Available by againjj · · Score: 1

      I swear, I read slashdot for the articles.

    105. Re:Making Available by mdwh2 · · Score: 1

      That would be even worse, as you could just mod down the person you disa

      I agree with the other poster: debate, don't censor. Negative moderation is meant to get rid of people that aren't promoting debate - trolls and flamebait. A "clueless" mod doesn't make sense - and if it did, then apostrophesemicolon would be deserving of it.

    106. Re:Making Available by GigaplexNZ · · Score: 1

      That would be even worse, as you could just mod down the person you disa

      Yes, there would be room for abuse for people who would normally only comment (I hardly think that adding a comment to a downmod would be worse than a downmod by itself). Although at the moment there isn't much room to do the right thing either. What happens if I see a gem of a comment and mod it up, then scroll down and see something that is plain wrong (or I strongly disagree with)? I can't attempt to debate it without canceling out the up-mod so am only left with the option of ignoring it or down-modding. Normally I ignore but sometimes can't resist the temptation.

      Perhaps making modding of a comment and replying directly to that comment mutually exclusive, but otherwise allow both moderating and commenting in the same article?

      PS: Thanks for the healthy debate ;)

    107. Re:Making Available by tepples · · Score: 1

      I currently have mod points. I could've just mod you down for "stupid", or "clueless".

      What should I have done to go about becoming no longer clueless about this topic?

      Both options aren't available, and "overrated" is not satisfying enough.

      You could have done what some other people do: find five random posts in someone's posting history and mod them "overrated" to make your moderation immune to metamoderation.

    108. Re:Making Available by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ... or any other media.

    109. Re:Making Available by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Site is up but the torrents aren't there :(

    110. Re:Making Available by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >> To take it a step further, isn't Sony, Pioneer, Denon, or any other manufacturer of a cassette tape deck "making copyright infringement available" by providing me with a means of copying a CD to cassette?

      Very true. I'm still amazed why HDD and CD/DVD manufacturers aren't being hunted down too, since they "provide the means" to copy.

      >> How many mix tapes did you make in high school for friends or wouldbe girlfriends?
      [PARSE ERROR: TOKEN 15: OPERATOR OVERLOADED WITH IMPOSSIBILITY]

    111. Re:Making Available by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, I like F the best. You can keep the T&A.

      No, wait... I want that too...

    112. Re:Making Available by hannson · · Score: 1

      I fail to have every seen a need for the over rated though.

      Sometimes a post is insightful and interesting but not quite +5. You can't mod it down as redundant, flamebait or troll and that's when you mod it overrated so the post can still get a respectful +3 Insightful. But IMO this is highly off topic (not your post but the direction the discussion is heading).

    113. Re:Making Available by jonbryce · · Score: 1

      Sharereactor did back in the days when it was still around.

    114. Re:Making Available by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe he didnt find the proper keygen

    115. Re:Making Available by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Swedish police raided and took down a russian free newssite while they raided Piratebay (servers in same server room at PRQ webhosting) , said newspage (protected by Swedish law, with the right licenses "utgivningsbevis") still hasn't gotten thier servers back.

      I don't think journalism would stop a political trial like this.

    116. Re:Making Available by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, but for circuvention we have the same laws in Sweden. You cannot, own, offer for sale, operate or control any device that can be used to bypass a DRM system, so calculators, pen and paper and computers are pretty much out of the picture. Though the human mind probably doesn't count as a device in Swedish law

    117. Re:Making Available by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i'm american, so i'd say yes it is.

    118. Re:Making Available by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and I make your daughter's ass available by putting my dick in it every night. sue me.

    119. Re:Making Available by HPXX · · Score: 1

      Domain Name:THEPIRATEBAYTIMES.ORG Created On:18-Feb-2009 05:53:16 UTC Expiration Date:18-Feb-2010 05:53:16 UTC Too late.

    120. Re:Making Available by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But is it outside the realm of possibility that the reporter actually already knew how bit torrent worked or otherwise decided to look it up in order to compose an informed article?

      Yes.

    121. Re:Making Available by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's you! I love you.

    122. Re:Making Available by Trogre · · Score: 1

      For statements of /opinion/ as above, then yes of course your assertion holds.

      But if a post is /factually/ wrong, for example "Macs are made of contaminated gelatine and kill anyone who uses them within 6 weeks and the atomic number of Caesium is exactly 3", it absolutely should be modded to oblivion. Think of it as the antithesis of the "informative" mod.

      It has exactly nothing to do with censorship, since anyone can browse at -1, and a lot to do with not wasting the time of the rest of us who like to browse at +3.

      --
      "Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
    123. Re:Making Available by troll8901 · · Score: 1

      I for one use TPB exclusively for HD documentaries.

      Do your HD documentaries have a minimum age limit for watching?

    124. Re:Making Available by troll8901 · · Score: 1

      listening to us assholes

      (Mob of people bringing pitchforks, torches, Goatse images and other USB devices, coming after you.)

      (Only that it took a few years to get them to leave their basement dwellings. And yes, they all have too little sunlight exposure.)

    125. Re:Making Available by mumblestheclown · · Score: 0

      There should be some button on slashdot to automatically post the same reply to responses like yours (some slippery slope reductio) , since they are so common, predictable, and wrong. Furthermore, they add to distract from discussion of the real issues.

      If you write a computer program, you must encode all of its behaviors and exceptions. So, you have to write code that handles the "laws" of pac man's movements on the board and what happens when he gets eaten by the ghosts. In effect, the Pac Man computer code is the sum of all laws in the pac man universe.

      Too many technically knowledgeable slashdotters assume that real-world law should be just like computer code - basically setting the laws for humans-as-pac-men. The problem with that is that the real world is much more complex than the pac man world not just in that the number of objects and their interactions is large, but also because the mechanisms for enforcing such laws are themselves fuzzy - you can pretty much be guaranteed that a computer will run the code that you program it with, but the mere act of writing a law does not in and of itself change the reality of the real world.

      Therefore, and this is the part that slashdotters have a real hard time understanding and accepting, real world law, even that written by teams of brilliant experts, is subject to interpretation. And by 'interpretation', I don't necessarily mean the wishy washy kind of moral reletavism that unenlightened people associate with it, but rather a more nuanced and deep understanding of the social and other balances at play.

      It's possible to spill a lot of verbage explaining why giving your daughter computer access would not be copyright infringement. Contrived terms like "substantial non-infringing uses" and so forth can be bandied about, as can all sorts of theories about intent, but in the end it comes down to simplicities that are generally not worth the effort to verbalize. A judge would use a lot of tacit knowledge about "what is a PC", "what is a daughter", "what are the likely intended uses of the PC" and so forth to quickly rule that such an action is not unlawful.

      There is no mathematical formula - this is why we call them JUDGES and not "excel spreadsheets", but intent matters, extent matters, relationships matter, and so do a lot of things that frustrate computer-scientist-wannabe-lawyers since they are not AND SHOULD NOT be easily quantifiable from the standpoint of law.

      Too often on slashdot we see some naive techie who reads somewhere that "sampling 10 seconds of 1 song is fair use" and therefore goes out of his way to program something by which [songlength/10] people each sample 10 seconds and then these 10 second blocks are re-sewn together or some other ludicrous scheme to try to get around some wrongheaded perception of copyright laws. I want to shake those people, give them my best Morbo impression and say very loudly:

      LAW DOES NOT WORK THAT WAY.

      It is a pity that these PirateBay guys are getting away with their actions due to poorly conceived swedish copyright law and apparently incompetent prosecutors. whatever you think of the RIAA/MPAA, it is clear that thePirateBay exists solely to facilitate the unauthorized duplication of material that people have worked hard to create. It's further clear that PirateBay is profiting immensely from their activities, if not financially (I have no idea), at least by reputation and similar internet "currency". It's also clear that in any other sphere, they'd be considered an organized criminal enterprise. We should not be cheering their victories.

    126. Re:Making Available by techsoldaten · · Score: 1

      Interesting perspective, but completely, utterly misses my original point. We're you trying to react to something some other person said?

      Yes, I am aware of the substantial impact of interpretation and subjective criteria in the rulings of law and no, I do not look at the world as a spreadsheet. If it were that way, we would all just get a copy of Black's Law Dictionary when we turned 18 and be told to read it.

      This is not a reductive argument, but one of equivalency. I mean, the law also uses fact and statistics as a primary determinant of judgements. We do still operate on the basis of reason, right?

      There are estimates that there are over 100 million Americans who have downloaded copyrighted materials without proper licensing of copyright holders. There are about 160 million Internet users in the US. If I give someone, anyone, a computer and Internet access, the statistical odds heavily favor that person downloading materials. If TPB can be taken to trial over posting links on the Internet to copyrighted materials soemone else posted, why can't search engines, downloaders, news outlets, and others be held to the same standard? Better yet, why wouldn't they?

      The legal point is whether or not someone is enabling others to commit copyright abuse / fraud / whatever people want to call it these days. And yes, ordinary people giving computers and access to their kids have been run through the legal mill over this already. That is exactly what the RIAA has been trying to argue in their civil suits and they have gotten courts to side with them.

      There are bad, unenforceable, ill conceived laws out there, and this is one of them. Laws about enabling access for people to infringe on valid copyrights are often so broadly defined they have the ability to outlaw behaviors of a broad majority of the population that can be considered innoculous at best. There is plenty of evidence to suggest these laws do not actually protect the interests of creators or copyright holders, but instead distributors and middle men seeking to reinforce outdated business models moreso than represent talent.

      M

    127. Re:Making Available by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think the differentiating aspect is intent. You don't intend for your daughter to infringe other peoples' copyright by providing her with an internet connection...and it could be argued that there is no other reason for TPB to host torrents, the vast majority of which result in illegal downloads.

    128. Re:Making Available by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      BULLSHIT! Nothing about selling guns is morally objectionable. If someone wants to sell a gun and someone wants to purchase a gun, so what? If the buyer tells the seller "Hey, I want this so I can go on the offensive!" then what the BUYER wants to do is morally objectionable and the SELLER should say "sorry pal... that's not cool and I'm not selling to you. That BUYER should then be reported to the authorities".

      Now if the BUYER keeps her mouth shut about her intentions, how is the SELLER to know what they are?

      Just because something has the potential for bad uses doesn't make the item bad per se. A car could be used to cause injury en masse or just on a one-to-one scale. But we don't say cars are morally objectionable.

      Water, plain ole water, can be used for good and bad (waterboarding anyone?). Do we say that people who sell water are committing a morally objectionable act?

    129. Re:Making Available by Jurily · · Score: 1

      But who's going to have the time to write reviews of so many feature films and their respective encode jobs?

      The uploader of course.

  2. The World-wide spotlight must burn... by Vandil+X · · Score: 3, Insightful

    ....especially when millions of people world-wide are waiting scream "Bullsh!t" (in all forms of media) the moment the prosecution tries to submit some in court.

    --
    Up, Up, Down, Down, Left, Right, Left, Right, B, A, START
  3. The alliance with the ninjas pays off! by elrous0 · · Score: 4, Funny

    Yea, ye' scruvy IFPI may have girded themselves to face yourn dreaded pirates alone. But pirates and ninjas be allied now!

    --
    SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    1. Re:The alliance with the ninjas pays off! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Yea, ye' scruvy IFPI may have girded themselves to face yourn dreaded pirates alone. But pirates and ninjas be allied now!

      Zombie sasquatches everywhere will quake in terror, leaving the robot clowns to pick up the slack.

  4. Only matter of time? by E+IS+mC(Square) · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Good to hear this news.

    But From TFA: "What has been shown in court today is that the prosecutor cannot prove that the .torrent files he is using as evidence actually used The Pirate Bay's tracker. Many of the screenshots being used clearly state there is no connection to the tracker. Additionally, prosecutor HÃ¥kan Roswall didn't adequately explain the function of DHT which allows for so called "trackerless" torrents."

    So, it is only matter of time they are back later with stronger evidences?

    1. Re:Only matter of time? by MathFox · · Score: 4, Informative

      So, it is only matter of time they are back later with stronger evidences?

      At this stage of the process the prosecutor has to present the evidence he has gathered to the judge; the defence gets time to present rebuttal evidence. When all evidence is presented, it is time for legal interpretation (pleading). It is planned that the judges have all the information they need in three weeks, so that only gives prosecution a few days to bring up new evidence.

      And because it is a criminal trial, prosecution can not come back with another case based on the same facts... so dropping the charges now has permanent impact.

      --
      extern warranty;
      main()
      {
      (void)warranty;
      }
    2. Re:Only matter of time? by cdrudge · · Score: 5, Funny

      So, it is only matter of time they are back later with stronger evidences?

      Or at least better screen shots.

    3. Re:Only matter of time? by hattig · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Surely the best way would be to download a torrent from The Pirate Bay in front of the Judge, leave it downloading during the trial (no intervention), and then once it was complete, show that you downloaded a copyrighted piece of material.

      I suggest they go to "Porn -> Movies" for the in-trial example usage of the website.

      To be honest, I would like to see how they can defend against the "assisting making available" argument, apart from the fact that this charge seems so ridiculous. They're not committing copyright infringement. They're not making the copyrighted files available. Nooo, they're just allowing people to make available themselves.

    4. Re:Only matter of time? by meringuoid · · Score: 5, Insightful
      And because it is a criminal trial, prosecution can not come back with another case based on the same facts... so dropping the charges now has permanent impact.

      Are they the same facts, though? Suppose I'm trying to convict a burglar, I turn up in court with evidence of his burglaries, and that evidence is ruled inadequate and he is acquitted; I cannot now convict him of those burglaries, double jeopardy and all. But he's a burglar, and afterwards he carries on in that line of work. I can gather evidence on his new burglaries, and make sure it's sound this time around.

      Similarly, since TPB are certainly not going to stop linking to torrents, if they are acquitted here due to technical flaws in the prosecution's evidence, then they can't be charged again over those particular torrents - but new ones are published every day, and the prosecution could try again with a different set of specific torrents, and with more complete evidence.

      --
      Real Daleks don't climb stairs - they level the building.
    5. Re:Only matter of time? by Jedi+Alec · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Surely the best way would be to download a torrent from The Pirate Bay in front of the Judge, leave it downloading during the trial (no intervention), and then once it was complete, show that you downloaded a copyrighted piece of material.

      I suggest they go to "Porn -> Movies" for the in-trial example usage of the website.

      To be honest, I would like to see how they can defend against the "assisting making available" argument, apart from the fact that this charge seems so ridiculous. They're not committing copyright infringement. They're not making the copyrighted files available. Nooo, they're just allowing people to make available themselves.

      Immediately after which the lawyer defending them would create a torrent of his own of the trial's proceedings and seed it, demonstrating where the content is coming from and where it goes.

      --

      People replying to my sig annoy me. That's why I change it all the time.
    6. Re:Only matter of time? by TubeSteak · · Score: 1

      And because it is a criminal trial, prosecution can not come back with another case based on the same facts... so dropping the charges now has permanent impact.

      Dropping the charges now does not have a permanent impact.

      Remember that they are prosecuting an idea.
      The idea being that trackers = assisting copyright infringement.
      The specific infringement & evidence is easily replaced.

      It'll take them all of an hour to put together a new package of evidence which includes torrents using TPB as a tracker.

      --
      [Fuck Beta]
      o0t!
    7. Re:Only matter of time? by mrclisdue · · Score: 1

      Or, download a slackware iso.

      cheers,

    8. Re:Only matter of time? by hvm2hvm · · Score: 3, Informative

      Your analogy is not right because for a burglar, the act of stealing is the crime and he is acquitted of one of his thefts. OTOH, if thepiratebay wins then the actions they are taking are ruled as 'not thieving' (i.e. they are legal) which means they can do it as they please afterwards (or until the US companies bully Sweden and the EU into changing their laws :P).

      --
      ics
    9. Re:Only matter of time? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You operate under the assumption the TPB actually has commited a crime.

    10. Re:Only matter of time? by MathFox · · Score: 1
      You are right that they can start a new investigation, into the new servers (abroad) and they'll have to prove that these same guys are still involved... In that sense dropping the charges was a good strategic move as it prevents a negative judgement on the issues.

      OTOH, prosecution will have to think about how to obtain evidence that the Pirate Bay tracker really is involved, in an environment where DHTs are used. It will take several man-years of investigation (again!) to make a new case.

      --
      extern warranty;
      main()
      {
      (void)warranty;
      }
    11. Re:Only matter of time? by Nick+Ives · · Score: 1

      No, GP is positing the existence of a prosecutor who thinks TPB may be committing a crime. He's arguing that the prosecutor can always come back with future examples of making available of copyrighted works with better evidence.

      It seems there's at least a valid question as to whether what TPB is doing is illegal under Swedish law otherwise they wouldn't be in court. That they've already had half the case dropped is good but they still have to defend against the other charges.

      --
      Nick
    12. Re:Only matter of time? by Nocturnal+Deviant · · Score: 1

      Could you link me to a double jeopardy clause in Swedish law please? Personally I'm not sure they have one.

      Of course I damn well hope they do. For more than just The Pirate Bays sake, imagine if they win this, after that they'll of course try and get the IP log's of all of the torrent uploader's and everything else.

      --
      -Noc
    13. Re:Only matter of time? by JesseMcDonald · · Score: 1

      Surely the best way would be to download a torrent from The Pirate Bay in front of the Judge, leave it downloading during the trial (no intervention), and then once it was complete, show that you downloaded a copyrighted piece of material.

      Defense against that should be simple enough; just monitor the network traffic while the file is downloading. Afterward, show that none of the file contents actually came from TPB. A simple chart showing how much data of any sort was received from TPB vs. the rest should be fairly conclusive.

      --
      "The state is that great fiction by which everyone tries to live at the expense of everyone else." - Bastiat
    14. Re:Only matter of time? by Stray7Xi · · Score: 1

      And if that burglar steals again, he can be tried again for that new crime.

      Piratebay isn't going to stop offering torrents. It's a matter of when one offense ends and another begins. Are they being charged for the system of offering torrents or are they being charged for specific torrents?

    15. Re:Only matter of time? by Dare+nMc · · Score: 1

      because it is a criminal trial, prosecution can not come back with another case based on the same facts... so dropping the charges now has permanent impact.

      This statement was unclear. I think what your point should have been: Dropping charges now means they can bring those charges back to court at anytime they want (new evidence or not.) Thats at least how English law works, I don't know anything about Swedish law. The remaining charges are the ones that cannot be brought back. So if the prosecutor wants to extend the case as long as possible, he drops the significant charges. Brings forward the meaningless ones. Learns the defense strategy, gathers evidence, tries to get the defendants on record admitting their actions. The verdict of the first trial doesn't matter then, the prosecutor can then just bring back the dismissed/more difficult charges in a new case.

    16. Re:Only matter of time? by Dtyst · · Score: 1

      Would the lawyer by doing this do this be incriminating himself in front of a judge!? Still Pirate bay did nothing but showed again where files are available. The lawyer would be the one downloading and sharing the file. And the peers would be the one distributing it. Also the defense could just demonstrate the same using Google.

    17. Re:Only matter of time? by Monsuco · · Score: 1

      Nooo, they're just allowing people to make available themselves.

      Which of course begs the question, how is bittorrent itself, or even the whole internet legal if that isn't?

    18. Re:Only matter of time? by Kjella · · Score: 1

      Your analogy is not right because for a burglar, the act of stealing is the crime and he is acquitted of one of his thefts. OTOH, if thepiratebay wins then the actions they are taking are ruled as 'not thieving' (i.e. they are legal) which means they can do it as they please afterwards

      Nonsense. There are two essential parts of a conviction, findings of fact and findings of law. Evidence goes to the findings of fact, and poor evidence would say nothing more than that the prosecution has failed to show that the alledged actions actually happened. Findings of fact will have no impact on findings of law. A finding of law would be that even if the court assumes the alledged actions as proven, they are not in violation of the law. In short, one would be for the court to find "We can not find sufficient evidence that TPB has assisted in the making available of copyrighted works" the other would be "Even if we assume that TBP has assisted in the making available of copyrighted works, this is not a prosecutable offence under current Swedish copyright law." Obviously in the first case they could try proving it again with new allegations and new evidence.

      You'd think that findings of law didn't happen all too often, that the criminal actions are well-defined in the law but they aren't. Take for example theft, is it theft to break into someone's house and steal something? Yes. Is it theft to pick up a newspaper lying in public under a sign saying "Free newspapers"? No. But somewhere in the grays inbetween you can have court cases and rulings like "Even though we find the circumstances under which A took B's property against B's will proven, the court finds that A had reasonable grounds to believe his actions were legitimate and so we find him not guilty." In fact, it's pretty much all the supreme courts do, resolve details in the findings of law. Hopefully we will get some clear findings of law out of this. But if we only get findings of fact TPB really just go back in the legal gray from which it came.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    19. Re:Only matter of time? by jaraxle · · Score: 1

      So, it is only matter of time they are back later with stronger evidences?

      Or at least better screen shots.

      Is there a legal way of saying "screenshot or it didn't happen"?

      ~jaraxle

    20. Re:Only matter of time? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They're not making the copyrighted files available. Nooo, they're just allowing people to make available themselves.

      And how is this different form using google to look for torrents? Or the ISP for providing net access in the first place?

    21. Re:Only matter of time? by Petaris · · Score: 1

      Is there double jeopardy in Sweden? There is in the US and I would suspect other countries have similar laws but does Sweden?

      Just asking out of curiosity.

      Thanks,

      --
      ~Petaris "The world is open. Are you?"
    22. Re:Only matter of time? by HTH+NE1 · · Score: 2, Informative

      It depends if they're being brought up on the individual actions or the entire business model. If it's the latter and they are acquitted, they can continue to do the underlying actions as they are shielded under the acquitted business model.

      This is why you prosecute the actions of organized crime and not the organization of crime itself.

      --
      Oh, say does that Star-Spangled Banner entwine / The myrtle of Venus with Bacchus's vine?
    23. Re:Only matter of time? by Kiralan · · Score: 1

      Plan:
            Immediately search for the same file on Google
            Get an equivalent .torrent file from a different source
            Insist prosecutor go after Google for 'assisting making available'

      --
      V for Vendetta: People should not be afraid of their governments. Governments should be afraid of their people.
    24. Re:Only matter of time? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Similarly, since TPB are certainly not going to stop linking to torrents, if they are acquitted here due to technical flaws in the prosecution's evidence, then they can't be charged again over those particular torrents - but new ones are published every day, and the prosecution could try again with a different set of specific torrents, and with more complete evidence.

      Isn't the reason half the charges have been dropped more like the question of: Do you convict a hardware store owner of facilitating murder because he makes available axes and those axes can be used for committing murder? Exchange the worlds "hardware store" for "web site", "murder" for "copyright violation" and "axes" for "torrents" and you have the problem the Swedish prosecutor failed to deal with. I don't like the punks at PB, nobody else I know who runs a software business does, but Swedish law is the law and if this prosecutor can't even grasp the nature of what is going on at PB those the punks who operate PB deserve to get off the hook... for now... Maybe it will teach the Swedish prosecutor's office to pick a more competent lawyer, equip him with a good technological advisor and then pick a more imaginative approach next time they go after PB. There is no chance these guys will stop doing what they are doing, they are way to cocky to stop now, this mess will only encourage them so new evidence will be easy to come by.

    25. Re:Only matter of time? by Celc · · Score: 1

      I know you are joking but I'd like to point out that screen shots are dismissed as evidence in Swedish court, or at least so has been the case previously. The only thing the horrible screen shots meant, was that they didn't even have to make that point to begin with.

    26. Re:Only matter of time? by d474 · · Score: 1

      To be honest, I would like to see how they can defend against the "assisting making available" argument...

      That's easy. After the demonstration is complete, explain to them ALL the technologies which also "assisted making available" the copyrighted content: The operating system, the web browser, the hardware, etc...

      Every component involved "assists", indeed, makes possible the downloading of copyrighted content. So why stop at Pirate Bay, because it's the last step? But it's not. The last step is the user who issues the commands by clicking the button "download" torrent.

      --
      Authority questions you. Return the favor.
    27. Re:Only matter of time? by Gnavpot · · Score: 1

      Is there double jeopardy in Sweden? There is in the US and I would suspect other countries have similar laws but does Sweden?

      I don't know about Sweden, but in Denmark both the defendant and the prosecutor has the right to appeal without giving any reason.

    28. Re:Only matter of time? by KnightMB · · Score: 1

      Are they the same facts, though? Suppose I'm trying to convict a burglar, I turn up in court with evidence of his burglaries, and that evidence is ruled inadequate and he is acquitted; I cannot now convict him of those burglaries, double jeopardy and all. But he's a burglar, and afterwards he carries on in that line of work. I can gather evidence on his new burglaries, and make sure it's sound this time around.

      Similarly, since TPB are certainly not going to stop linking to torrents, if they are acquitted here due to technical flaws in the prosecution's evidence, then they can't be charged again over those particular torrents - but new ones are published every day, and the prosecution could try again with a different set of specific torrents, and with more complete evidence.

      Your analogy is flawed in that the burglar stealing is already a crime. The case is about a new interpretation by *someone else* that the law also means something else, in this case, that the pirate bay is breaking that law in a way that has never been brought up before the court. They lost the first part, basically meaning that the pirate bay doesn't really let you download movies or anything else. I just gives you a file that tells you where to find it elsewhere. The second part now is about making something available to assist in breaking the law. If that is shot down, then the pirate bay will be able to continue what it does until either the laws change or they quit what they are doing. I don't see the second ever happening.

    29. Re:Only matter of time? by houghi · · Score: 1

      Nooo, they're just allowing people to make available themselves.

      The question is if that is illegal or not. I would think (hope) not.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    30. Re:Only matter of time? by discordia666 · · Score: 2, Funny

      Surely the best way would be to download a torrent from The Pirate Bay in front of the Judge, leave it downloading during the trial (no intervention), and then once it was complete, show that you downloaded a copyrighted piece of material.

      While at the same time the sysadmin at the piratebay monitors connections from the courthouse and reroutes the request for the pirated torrent to http://torrents.thepiratebay.org/4469310/Rick_Astley_-_Never_gonna_give_you_up.avi.4469310.TPB.torrent

    31. Re:Only matter of time? by martin-boundary · · Score: 1

      I don't like the punks at PB

      Punks, eh? Look at the photographs, mate, they don't look like punks at all. Did you even live in the 80s?

    32. Re:Only matter of time? by lawpoop · · Score: 1

      IANAL, but I think in the US system, you are acquitted of a crime, regardless of the evidence. So, say you have some evidence that a a guy stole your VCR. It goes to trial, evidence is presented, and the guy is found not guilty. He cannot be re-tried for that crime, regardless of what future evidence of him doing the VCR theft you might find. However, if you find evidence that he stole your DVD player in that same trip, that is a separate crime, and he can be charged for that.

      --
      Computers are useless. They can only give you answers.
      -- Pablo Picasso
    33. Re:Only matter of time? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      yes but after this trial I'm sure they're going to move their servers "offshore" to some other IP-lawless country/territory.

    34. Re:Only matter of time? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Going after the High-Def rips instead?

    35. Re:Only matter of time? by Thomas+Cruise · · Score: 1

      Which is what torrent client authors do as well, maybe they should sue them as well...

      --
      Linux is for those who hate windows, *BSD is for those who love UNIX, Plan 9 is for practical folks like me.
    36. Re:Only matter of time? by Neeperando · · Score: 1

      Do you convict a hardware store owner of facilitating murder because he makes available axes and those axes can be used for committing murder? Exchange the worlds "hardware store" for "web site", "murder" for "copyright violation" and "axes" for "torrents" and you have the problem the Swedish prosecutor failed to deal with.

      You're right that the prosecutor didn't adequately deal with this, but to be a more accurate analogy the "hardware store" would called Murder Weapon Central, they sell mostly axes, large knives, handguns and rat poison, and when people accuse them of facilitating murder they point to the one tiny section of the store that sells levels and tape measures and say, "Look, this proves we're really just a hardware store, look at all the non-murder related things we sell, plus, there are plenty of non-murder related uses for axes, large knives, handguns and rat poison!".

      This doesn't make the prosecution any less off-base, but there's no doubt in my mind that TPB violates at least the spirit of copyright law, if not the letter.

      --
      Being a computer scientist means you tell people how computers should work, not that you know how they actually work.
  5. That just made my day.... by zappepcs · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It somehow just makes me feel better about the world when the "bully" gets a face-full of 'take that' from the underdog. I hope that the rest are dropped or mitigated to a wrist slap size judgment that allows TPB to continue operations as normal.

    1. Re:That just made my day.... by drinkypoo · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If they lose this case and all these servers get taken down, new ones will spring up. It's almost better for society if they lose, because it will prove the futility of playing whack-a-mole with internet freedom. (Whether you think that particular freedom is justified, it's still a freedom.)

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    2. Re:That just made my day.... by daveime · · Score: 1

      Why, because you didn't think of it first ?

    3. Re:That just made my day.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're a moron.

    4. Re:That just made my day.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They aren't distributing other people's hard work, they keep tabs on the people that are actually doing it. Besides, some people like having their hard work being distributed for free...

    5. Re:That just made my day.... by rundgren · · Score: 1

      it makes me feel physically sick that a bunch of Swedish criminal hippies.

      Is that you, Nixon?

    6. Re:That just made my day.... by jamstar7 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I agree. Record and movie company execs DESERVE their hookers and blow, their 30 minute work months, their strongarm government protections. How dare these criminals actually try to make these execs actually WORK for a living like us peasants???

      --
      Understanding the scope of the problem is the first step on the path to true panic.
    7. Re:That just made my day.... by MtlDty · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I fully agree that taking the servers down would be a futile act, but in no way would losing this case be better for society. If TPB win this case then it could bring about a sea change in how copyright infringement cases are brought to trial. Further it could be the first step in a loong overdue reform of copyright law. At the VERY least it would force the big media distributors to reassess their methods of getting digital content out to consumers.

      TPB has had around 25million+ peers connected through its trackers. And thats just one of the tracker sites. Shooting from the hip its easy to guess that at any given time there are 50,000,000 or more people downloading illegal torrents. You cant just expect to take a couple of guys to court to change the behaviour of ~50 million people. The media companies have got themselves into this mess with ridiculous DRM schemes, overpriced media and poor quality products. Its time for a change.

    8. Re:That just made my day.... by cliffski · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      OMFG

      are you that simpleminded that you think everyone in every entertainment industry from every country on earth has that lifestyle?

      Jesus you need to get out more kid. 99% of people working in software/movies/tv/games work as hard as you for the same or less than you earn.

      But hey, why bother with the facts when they get in the way of assholes expecting to get free stuff right?

      --
      DRM-free indie games for the PC and Mac: Positech Games
    9. Re:That just made my day.... by cliffski · · Score: 1

      amazingly some people still have a sense of morals that means they don't want to leech off others to make money.
      Clearly that's an alien concept among the kind of people who support these Swedish criminals.

      --
      DRM-free indie games for the PC and Mac: Positech Games
    10. Re:That just made my day.... by cliffski · · Score: 1

      wow. what a cutting argument mr coward, and typical given the mental age of TPB supporters.

      --
      DRM-free indie games for the PC and Mac: Positech Games
    11. Re:That just made my day.... by daveime · · Score: 1

      Well at least the Star Trek loving cat owners amongst us ;-)

      If advertising on your website is "leeching" then we might as well shut the internet down now according to your principles.

      Before you start bandying the word "criminals" about willy-nilly, you might like to think about this.

      Under Swedish law as it has stood for the past years, what they were doing was NOT illegal, as they have never made any content available. They connect filesharers together by essentially sharing a centralised database of IP numbers, and although there is a good proportion of copyrighted material on PirateBay, there is also a lot of NON-copyrighted software.

      As I understand it, the Swedish laws are being changed under pressure from the US and what they do MAY be considered illegal IN FUTURE. In which case they'll just switch servers to another haven, and business as usual. And as the case that took two years to prepare had half it's charges and evidence thrown out on day one, because the prosecuter ALSO made the same mistake as you i.e. accusing them of distributing copyright material, when this is patently not the case.

      While I get your point, and am not questioning your morals, using emotive and factually incorrect language is no better than tabloid sensationalism.

    12. Re:That just made my day.... by jamstar7 · · Score: 1

      are you that simpleminded that you think everyone in every entertainment industry from every country on earth has that lifestyle?

      No, kid, just the execs, which I specifically mentioned. Might wanna get your sarcasm meter recalibrated while yu're at it...

      Jesus you need to get out more kid. 99% of people working in software/movies/tv/games work as hard as you for the same or less than you earn.

      Ya think??? Industry contracts are designed to do two things: Dump as much of the overhead onto the artists while stealing everything you can of value from them, including the fillings in their teeth if you can pull it off. I managed a couple bar bands back in the day, and one of them got offered a record deal. Happy day, you think, right? I ran it past our lawyer who said he'd have them committed if they signed. It was a 3 record deal, 100K upfront against earnings, but the band had to pay for studio time, producer time (no choice of producer), session musicians (no choice in picking them), distributing, manufacturing, mastering, any catering to the studio during the tapings, and so on, all to come out of the artists' share of any profits down the line. They had to sign over copyrights and any performance rights for songs used on any albums. They had effectively zero artistic control. They signed anyways, hey, who doesn't want a record deal, right? First thing the label did was force them to fire me in favor of an inhouse manager. That's when I learned that it isn't what's right or wrong that counts in court, it's what you can prove.

      The 'happy ending'? They disbanded about 4 months after cutting their first album, dead broke. It was never released, but they still ended up owing the label the advance money and production costs. They all went bankrupt within 2 years and ended up taking up 'real jobs'.

      Back in the mid 70's someplace there was an ad for something, can't remember what off the top of my head, but part of it was an actor portraying a musician saying "I made $250,000 last year. If I do that again this year, I might break even."

      --
      Understanding the scope of the problem is the first step on the path to true panic.
    13. Re:That just made my day.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, kid, just the execs, which I specifically mentioned. Might wanna get your sarcasm meter recalibrated while yu're at it...

      One more time, not everybody who loses money thanks to PB is a cocaine snorting, hooker shagging, Porsche 911 driving corporate executive. Most of them are in fact people who work hard for what they have and suffer very real economic consequences from prats like you downloading for free the software/movies/tv-shows/music/games that they worked hard to produce. Maybe if you knock your head against a wall a few times it will jump start enough brains cells to allow you to understand that... not that I have high hopes... but miracles do happen.

  6. Hooray? by LordKaT · · Score: 4, Insightful

    So now instead of the "making available" theory, we get to see the "assisting making available" theory.

    I love how these lawyers think. If I gave a random guy in a wheelchair a push up a steep incline, and he had robbed a store sometime in the past, I would be an accessory to a crime.

    Seriously, can't we just round up all of the lawyers, executives, and directors and just fucking kill them already?

    1. Re:Hooray? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Seriously, can't we just round up all of the lawyers, executives, and directors and just fucking kill them already?
      Unfortunately on the executives and directors part, they will be immediately replaced by middle managers. Middle managers make executives and directors look nice except they don't have any power...

    2. Re:Hooray? by KibibyteBrain · · Score: 2, Interesting

      And wouldn't this make a ton of people liable. For example, the people who write software that enables ripping DVDs and CDs, the people who wrote the file sharing software, the people who wrote the OS used to run the software rip and share the content, the people who built the computers and servers used, the ISPs, and the telcos and fiber owners. They all have about the same role if not more in facilitating the copyright violations than the The Pirate Bay does in practice. After all, after finding peers, the tracker could go down and piracy could still be committed, leaving only these parties liable.

    3. Re:Hooray? by Drakin020 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      That is a terrible analogy.

      Saying that you just pushed a guy in a wheelchair not knowing that he was going to rob a store is one thing, but in this case a better analogy would be to say "I pushed a guy in a wheelchair towards a small store knowing he was going to rob it"

      TPB knows what they are doing. Hell their name says so. You can't say that they are just playing innocent here.

      --
      The greatest revenge in life is massive success.
    4. Re:Hooray? by Pvt_Ryan · · Score: 1

      Actaully it not great but its not overly wrong either.

      If they are found guilty then technically CD-Ripping software is illegal..

      Don't forget on TPB I can also find torrents for ubuntu / debian etc, which are legal.

      They just look for *.torrent, so it's not their fault if the results are meatloaf.torrent.

    5. Re:Hooray? by LordKaT · · Score: 1

      Of course it was a terrible analogy. I was trying to make the idea of murdering executives sound less like crazy talk.

    6. Re:Hooray? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If I gave a random guy in a wheelchair a push up a steep incline, and he had robbed a store sometime in the past, I would be an accessory to a crime.

      No no no, you have this all wrong, it is if he commits a crime some time in the future that would make you accessory to the crime.

    7. Re:Hooray? by horza · · Score: 1

      Car manufacturers know perfectly well that their vehicles are used to facilitate robberies. Hammer manufacturers know a number of their products will be directly used for murder.

      The question is whether they are assisting or wehther they making available public resources which are being 'abused'. If they offered $1 for each file being uploaded and then made an average of $4 per file through advertising on the download page then this would be a pretty clear cut case. If you are simple acting as a Google, then you have to balance public interest and setting dangerous precedents against the rights of the copyright holders.

      Phillip.

    8. Re:Hooray? by mrclisdue · · Score: 1

      Anyone who downloads a meatloaf.torrent should be charge with crimes against culture.

      Or assisting the demise of culture, if those charges are dropped.

      For some reason I'm pining for yogourt.

      cheers,

    9. Re:Hooray? by ebuck · · Score: 1

      Good thing I can't practice law, I'd be one step ahead of them: Aiding and Abetting the Assistance of Making Available Material that Might be Copyrighted.

      If in risk of losing the case, follow it up with Obstruction of Justice via Using Technology to Confusing to Allow the Speedy Determination of Guilt.

      Any argument can be made to sound good, but it still doesn't separate the wheat from the chaff.

    10. Re:Hooray? by Maxo-Texas · · Score: 1

      Actually, it is be more like running a service that connects wheelchair robbers with people who will push them into stores to rob them.

      You maintain a list of addresses of people willing to push them and provide those addresses to would be robbers.

      --
      She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
    11. Re:Hooray? by Stray7Xi · · Score: 1

      So now instead of the "making available" theory, we get to see the "assisting making available" theory.

      Actually it's assisting assisting making available.

      The seeders make available.
      The trackers assist by providing access to seeders.
      Piratebay assists by providing torrents (links) to trackers.

      Substitute "Copyright Infringement" for "Making Available" if you see fit, the argument is the same.

    12. Re:Hooray? by Zerth · · Score: 1

      You have a point. TPB is more like "Bob's Discount Motel. We don't have whores, but our rooms are billed in 5 minute increments. No drugs, either, but surgical tubing is available at the front desk, there is a sharps box under the sink, and the guy down the street delivers if you yell."

    13. Re:Hooray? by Drakin020 · · Score: 1

      Ok, I may be going a bit far with this one, but do you think that Iraq should be punished for harboring terrorist? (Not saying they are or are not, this is not a political discussion) But let's assume they were. They were giving a home for terrorism to flourish. Is that not what TPB is doing in regards to illegal software distribution?

      Yes I know the two are on totally opposite ends, it's just an analogy.

      --
      The greatest revenge in life is massive success.
    14. Re:Hooray? by jamstar7 · · Score: 1

      Seriously, can't we just round up all of the lawyers, executives, and directors and just fucking kill them already?

      Kill lawyers? I gotta say NO to that, as long as organisations like PETA exist to eliminate the lab rat. Who else is useless enough to use in their place?

      Record and movie company execs, on the other tentacle, I have no problem with the concept you mentioned. Until we run out of lawyers, that is...

      Where can I sign up for your newsletter?

      --
      Understanding the scope of the problem is the first step on the path to true panic.
    15. Re:Hooray? by jamstar7 · · Score: 1

      They just look for *.torrent, so it's not their fault if the results are meatloaf.torrent.

      They found my recipe book, the one I wrote??? I'LL SUE!!

      --
      Understanding the scope of the problem is the first step on the path to true panic.
    16. Re:Hooray? by HTH+NE1 · · Score: 1

      Good thing I can't practice law, I'd be one step ahead of them: Aiding and Abetting the Assistance of Making Available Material that Might be Copyrighted.

      Nah, Attempted Conspiracy to Attempt to Aid and Abet the Assistance of Making Available Material that Might be Copyrighted.

      --
      Oh, say does that Star-Spangled Banner entwine / The myrtle of Venus with Bacchus's vine?
    17. Re:Hooray? by shish · · Score: 1

      Hammer manufacturers know a number of their products will be directly used for murder.

      If they advertised as "Bob's Murder Weapons -- No matter how big or how small, we have the tool you need to most efficiently maul your coworkers and classmates", and 99% of their customers made use of them in such a way, I'm pretty sure someone would complain about them too :P

      --
      I mod down anyone who says "I will be modded down for this", regardless of the rest of their comment
  7. Assisting making available by Hatta · · Score: 5, Funny

    That's not vague or anything.

    --
    Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    1. Re:Assisting making available by windsurfer619 · · Score: 0, Troll

      There should be a rule on slashdot where your comment must be longer than your sig.

    2. Re:Assisting making available by funkatron · · Score: 5, Funny

      "Assisting making available is not vague. It is the most specific charge we could make up and it means whatever the pirate bay did." - The Prosecutor

      --
      "Welcome to our world. We are the wasted youth. And we are the future too." Yes, I know these are stupid lyrics.
    3. Re:Assisting making available by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why?

      --
      Why not?

  8. My favourite part... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    "It's a largely technical issue that changes nothing in terms of our compensation claims and has no bearing whatsoever on the main case against The Pirate Bay. In fact it simplifies the prosecutor's case by allowing him to focus on the main issue, which is the making available of copyrighted works," IFPI's legal counsel said.

    Here's to having the case simplified to the point it allows the prosecutor to focus on other cases...

  9. Re:Go Pirate Gay!!!1! by Yvan256 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Nope, they only support half the theft.

    From this point on, everybody needs to stop their illegal torrents when they reach 50%. Thank you.

  10. Then libraries are in *big* trouble! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Libraries provide all sorts of assistance. Why, they even have a professionals devoted to "assisting making available" -- librarians. I ask them where I can find a (copyrighted) book, and they not only tell me, but they let me borrow that (copyrighted) work!!! After that, I could either be following the law or not. How do they know I don't have a photocopier or scanner set up at home to "steal" the whole thing? What's worse, governments provide all sorts of financial assistance for libraries on the premise it is a "public good" to make these (copyrighted) materials available. They're obviously complicit in any copyright infringement that occurs.

    Do the math! Next up: print publishers sue librarians and government for "assisting making available" copyrighted works.

    1. Re:Then libraries are in *big* trouble! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It won't work. The reason TPB is being attacked is because it involves computers. Computers are scary. Anything done with a computer is a million times worse than the same thing done without a computer. Librarians might be scary, but they're not scary in the same way.

    2. Re:Then libraries are in *big* trouble! by RabidMoose · · Score: 1

      And what's more, in my county at least, is that the libraries let me take home DVD's and music CD's!! Not only that, but they freely provide computers (and a free Wi-Fi connection) which would allow me to access and distribute copyrighted material!

      Somebody alert the RIAA, the local governments need to be their next target.

    3. Re:Then libraries are in *big* trouble! by halcyon1234 · · Score: 1

      Next up: print publishers sue librarians and government for "assisting making available" copyrighted works.

      You jest, but reality is sickeningly way ahead of you.

      That's the "Public Lending Right", which is being put into place in Canada, and exists in several other countries. Basically, authors complained long and loud enough that libraries were "stealing" from them by denying them their "rightful" royalty on each lend.

      Nevermind that one lend != one sale-- or that cash-strapped libraries can't afford the millions of dollars per year this would require-- or that there's no system in place to keep an author from having people check our their own work multiple times to goose their fund-- or that free libraries are meant to be free-- or that I tend to rant on this because I think its despicable...

    4. Re:Then libraries are in *big* trouble! by Rycross · · Score: 1

      *sigh* *facepalm*

      Ok look, the difference between libraries and copying media is that when a library gives out a book, they no longer have that book. They are not making copies, and thus copyright does not apply. Lending a book is, likewise, the same. Making a copy of a DVD is not the same because you are creating a new copy! It's all well and good to debate the usefulness of copyright and to be pissed at the RIAA, but at least try to get the basic fundamentals correct so you don't look like a moron.

    5. Re:Then libraries are in *big* trouble! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And what's more, in my county at least, is that the libraries let me take home DVD's and music CD's!!

      And what's more, in my country at least, making copies of the DVDs and CDs for private use is legal.

    6. Re:Then libraries are in *big* trouble! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But well... I don't know the Swedish law about the subject but I know Finnish law and more often than not, our law is quite similar to our western neighbour's.

      Our copyright regulations (in Finnish) specifically excerpt libraries (and a few other sources) from the laws.

      I am not allowed to collect tax from my neighbours but my government is. Similarly saying that "if libraries can do something, I should be allowed to" doesn't work.

    7. Re:Then libraries are in *big* trouble! by forand · · Score: 2, Informative

      Please go to a more modern library which often have digital copies available. For that matter go to many publishers sites and see how much you can download. Hell Tor sends me copyrighted works in PDF every week. Regardless you did not understand the parent's post: the library gave you a book you could copy that content thus they "assisted" you in copyright infringement.

    8. Re:Then libraries are in *big* trouble! by Rycross · · Score: 2, Interesting

      No, you didn't understand mine. A library lends me a book. I can read that book. I can also copy it. But the act of the library lending me that book doesn't necessitate or, in and of itself, promote copying that book. Providing a torrent link promotes copying that material, and in order to use the material pointed to by the torrent, you have to copy it. That's why its different, and that's why the post was stupid.

      A copyright holder freely distributing their copyright (in your examples of Tor and the publishers' site), is perfectly acceptable under copyright. Last time I went to a library, they did not give me free copies of digital materials in their entirety. In other words, they provided digital materials, but they did not break copyright.

      Again, the post showed such a grievous misunderstanding of copyright and the prosecution's argument that I can't call it anything other than moronic. I hate the RIAA, I want copyright reform, and I don't like this lawsuit, but that doesn't mean I'm going to give a thumbs up to an argument against these when it's founded on complete and utter bullshit.

    9. Re:Then libraries are in *big* trouble! by Pentium100 · · Score: 1

      While the library does not have that book temporarily, the person who borrowed it can use a photocopier or a scanner to make a copy of that book, then return the original to the library. Therefore, the library is "making available" the book for copying.

    10. Re:Then libraries are in *big* trouble! by Rycross · · Score: 1

      The person using that book does not necessitate making an unauthorized copy, nor is it implied that the library is lending it to them for the purpose of making an unauthorized copy. That's the point!

    11. Re:Then libraries are in *big* trouble! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are people now that braindead that they even buy that argument?

      I am quite sure your scenario would be a big issue if it happened at the scale at which the pirate bay is operating. It is not only about what is possible, but about what is really happening.

      Then the next questions would be:
      - Is that "assisting making available" their main activity?
      - Do they undertake any actions to prevent that? (like youtube)
      - Is there anything reasonable they could do? (like reviewing the torrents before they are made available, or at least remove them when they get notice about illegal actions)

  11. Google, Microsoft and Yahoo too by flyingfsck · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Effectively, any search engine and the whole internet itself assists in 'making available'.

    --
    Excuse me, but please get off my Pennisetum Clandestinum, eh!
    1. Re:Google, Microsoft and Yahoo too by bonch · · Score: 1

      I love when people make this retarded argument, completely ignoring that PirateBay acts as a tracker server which means it's specifically connecting IPs for the purposes of distributing file chunks.

      Why is Slashdot so pro-piracy in every situation? I've never understood it. Why would you ever rationally take a position in SUPPORT of Pirate Bay?

    2. Re:Google, Microsoft and Yahoo too by JasterBobaMereel · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The Pirate Bay is a search engine for Trackers - what it searches for and indexes are torrents rather than websites or documents/pictures etc on websites ... but it is a search engine ....This is not illegal and no-one can claim it is ....

      But it is also a tracker server as well and this is what the case is about ... is this illegal or not (in Sweden)? Currently the law in Sweden has appeared to be that it is but some people are not sure and want to test this (or there would be no case)

      Piracy is not the issue, harassing people involved in legal acts is ... the Pirate bay has operated legally (under Swedish Law as is stands) but has been hounded and threatened repeatedly by large corporations and industry bodies (mostly from other countries) and oddly most /.ers think this is wrong ....

      --
      Puteulanus fenestra mortis
    3. Re:Google, Microsoft and Yahoo too by HTH+NE1 · · Score: 1

      I love when people make this retarded argument, completely ignoring that PirateBay acts as a tracker server which means it's specifically connecting IPs for the purposes of distributing file chunks.

      So it's like DNS, or like TCP/IP? Everything's a file chunk. You're reading one now.

      Why is Slashdot so pro-piracy in every situation? I've never understood it. Why would you ever rationally take a position in SUPPORT of Pirate Bay?

      Because copyright duration is insufficiently limited and is infinitely extensible due to the whims of the inheritors of the rights to a crudely drawn cartoon mouse? Just a theory.

      TPB publishes facts. What people do with those facts is their business. Are you suggesting that certain facts or collections of facts should be illegal for someone to gather and publish?

      How many locations of drug dealing operations can one person know before he knows too many and can be held in custody indefinitely as an illegal criminal resource, and is Google Maps contributory for offering driving directions to these locations from anywhere in the world? When does public information become a state secret illegal to disclose?

      --
      Oh, say does that Star-Spangled Banner entwine / The myrtle of Venus with Bacchus's vine?
  12. Re:Ah, I see by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

    link spamming piece of shit. no one wants to read your fucking site. this is the 2nd time i have seen your shit posted in an unrelated thread today.

    fuck off and die

  13. Re:Go Pirate Gay!!!1! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Cool. I'll just make each torrent two files! One, that is 49% of the total files which is what you want, and the other, at 51%, which is random noise. Hell, I wonder if I can actually assign the relative priorities inside the torrent file itself...

  14. Go after IRL pirates by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If real pirates can take an entire fleet of ships then surley the bandwidth of an oil tanker full of hard drives should be used as the "real" pirate bay

  15. DUH? by Pig+Hogger · · Score: 1

    Well, DUH?, if they haven't been able to shut it down in years of raids and proceedings, why should they be able to do it in a few days trial???

  16. The accual .torrent-files by EyyySvenne · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The accual .torrent-files where not even submitted as evidence, only screenshots from the client. The prosecutor assumed that the only source of peers is a single tracker when it in reality can be multiple trackers, DHT, Peer Exchange, Local Peer Discovery and adding them manually. Note that the defence haven't even started to make it's case yet, this is just from the prosecutors own mistakes.

  17. The reason for dropping by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The reason for dropping the charges can be found between the lines of this article. Basically, TPB nicely informed the prosecution that there way no way in hell that they could prove which copyright infringements originated from the trackers provided by TPB (as opposed to, say, mininova or slotorrent).

    While I love this outcome (and the fact that it took TPB less than 24 hours to uproot the more serious charges brought against them), I'm not too happy about this approach. They're winning on technicalities, while I would have liked for them to win on principle.

    Anyway, I'll keep dreaming.

    1. Re:The reason for dropping by Just+Some+Guy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      While I love this outcome (and the fact that it took TPB less than 24 hours to uproot the more serious charges brought against them), I'm not too happy about this approach. They're winning on technicalities, while I would have liked for them to win on principle.

      While that would be grand, I'm sure they're happy to win on whatever legal theory keeps them out of prison.

      --
      Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
    2. Re:The reason for dropping by Pofy · · Score: 2, Interesting

      One other thing to note is that for the cases that are computer programs (all games I think) the part of making copies are not relevant at all since it is not a criminal offence to do so if the copy is for private use. It would be a civil case only and this is a criminal case.

      One other problem was the identificatio of the location of each peer. Since only those located in Sweden could be tested by the court and the prosecutor appearantly had not or could not accurately identify which one originated from Swedne and which one originated from abroad. This WILL have a bearing also on any possible ammount they can be sued for. They can only be sued for (in Sweden and in this trial) those copies that has been made in Sweden.

    3. Re:The reason for dropping by Svartalf · · Score: 1

      Heh... Even the cheap shots work, really. If the prosecution's really going to be that sloppy, go for it. Why take the high road and risk missing something in your legal theory that causes you to lose?

      --
      I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
    4. Re:The reason for dropping by Zerth · · Score: 1

      They can only be sued for (in Sweden and in this trial) those copies that has been made in Sweden.

      That makes life easy. Ban all swedish IPs, so both the seed and the leeches are outside of Sweden.

      Swedes will just have to use the canadian or finnish affiliate sites, kinda like if you live next door to an Amazon warehouse, you will never get a delivery from that warehouse, to avoid taxes.

    5. Re:The reason for dropping by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They're winning on technicalities, while I would have liked for them to win on principle.

      Anyway, I'll keep dreaming.

      so would i but these are lawyers battling lawyers, and this is how they fight. technicalities are their language, their idiom, their environment.

      a win by tpb's lawyers on their technicalities is a win for our principles.

    6. Re:The reason for dropping by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      a win by tpb's lawyers on their technicalities is a win for our principles.

      Perhaps, but it won't set a strong precedent.

    7. Re:The reason for dropping by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >> They're winning on technicalities,
      >> while I would have liked for them to win on principle.

      Newsflash. The outcome is as much "principle" and "spine" and "humanity" that the **aa have shown to their /paying/ customers.

      Beating opponents at a game, when playing by their rules, is a victory sweeter than any.

      However, as we've seen, it only results in the rules being changed(unfairly) once more.
      It's a legislative "boiling the frog" scenario, where you end up being the frog being boiled, and water is now replaced with oil.

      Wait till they start using coal tar; so much so for a question of 'principle'.

  18. Question about the prosecution by Gadget_Guy · · Score: 1

    So was the prosecution technically incompetent, or were they aware that it was wrong and just hoped that they would get away with it? I suppose that it is possible that they expected TPB to try to make a deal rather than go to court, and so had to hurredly put a case together at the last minute.

    They want to boost our morals, but they ended up boosting our morale!

    1. Re:Question about the prosecution by Xtravar · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Maybe the prosecution is just a show to keep the RIAA et al happy that "something" is being done.

      --
      Buckle your ROFL belt, we're in for some LOLs.
  19. Re:Hooray? Well, maybe... by davecb · · Score: 4, Informative

    A classic tactic in self-serving prosecutions is to charge a person with rape, pillage, robbery and illegal parking. Then, when the defendant is found guilty of illegal parking, the prosecutor can announce conviction, with most listeners thinking that the defendant was convicted of all the charges.

    --dave

    --
    davecb@spamcop.net
  20. What has been gained? by WhyMeWorry · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Why are people so happy? The linked article merely states that the prosecution didn't demonstrate that they had the evidence that they said that they have. I thought that slashdot wanted a verdict of "They are doing everything that is claimed and that is okay because it is legal". Why would slashdot be interested in the competency of the prosecution?

    1. Re:What has been gained? by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      I thought that slashdot wanted a verdict of "They are doing everything that is claimed and that is okay because it is legal". Why would slashdot be interested in the competency of the prosecution?

      The competence of the prosecution is relevant to the outcome of a trial just like the competence of a slashdotter is relevant to the outcome of a comment - and yours was a massive FAIL. Correlation does not imply causation, but if I were you, I'd think a little harder before I posted my next comment. Your question is like asking "Why would Niners fans care about the competency of the Raiders" or something, just plain dumb.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    2. Re:What has been gained? by should_be_linear · · Score: 2, Informative

      It boils down to: we understand issue rather well and think TPB is not guilty for people using it to find other people sharing files they like/need. Judge might or might not understand what is it all about, technology behind it quite complex, so it is preferable if TPB wins *whatever* way.

      --
      839*929
    3. Re:What has been gained? by Kjella · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Because slashdot has already decided who's morally right and wrong, and the law/case is considered bought/pressured/outdated/whatever anyway. While it's tough to prove who, when and how you know that in the file sharing community there are many actual file transfers going on, not making available or assisting to making available but direct violations of copyright law as found in every signatory of the Berne convention. After all, that's why people use file sharing, it's not for some theoretical potential but for actual downloads from actual uploaders. Listening to slashdot you could sometimes get the impression these were as rare as ghosts as we explore the "making available" defense, while everyone knows that is the real bread and butter of the community.

      In that sense, yes TPB may be able to distance itself enough to escape the law but it's not the real victory most people here want, because the law is still quite clear on what copyright violations are. Victory does not come through legal petitions, it comes through massive and blatant civil disobedience, and a TPB that gets a massive PR boost and is aquitted would have the MPAA/RIAA throwing fits. You know that the goal of keeping TPB alive is to further the cause of all it's users, whose message pretty much amounts to "What are you going to do, put the whole country in jail?". Face it, what people want is untouchability - downloaders shouldn't be prosecuted, uploaders are only making available and TPB is like google. That is effectively the nullification of copyright law as we know it. Sure it might be there on the books but it'd become a "sleeping law" without practical consequence.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
  21. It really looks like the prosecution will fail by erroneus · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Weird how they are giving up so quickly. I get the feeling that the prosecution doesn't actually want to win this. Could they be going through to motions to satisfy the demands made by MPAA/RIAA/**AA as relayed through the U.S. government to the government of the prosecution to make them just shut up? "Hey! We did what you asked and it failed! What would you like us to do now?"

    But even if there were some success in this, won't the result just be the development of technologies that make it even harder to prosecute?

    1. Re:It really looks like the prosecution will fail by Talar · · Score: 1

      If the prosecution fails the next step will be even heavier lobbying against politicians, "look what they are doing and they are getting away with it".

      There are a few legal changes related to IP law and the operators resposibilities coming up for discussion in the swedish parliament soon. A failed prosecution would likely be used to point out how unfair the content owners are being treated in Sweden compared to other countries.

    2. Re:It really looks like the prosecution will fail by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But even if there were some success in this, won't the result just be the development of technologies that make it even harder to prosecute?

      Yes--and the eventual result of continued, rampant infringement will be changes in the way content is created and distributed.

      For music, the focus of revenue generation is already shifting from recordings to live performances.

      For games, an internet connection and subscription will be required. Running substantial amounts of game logic on the server will make the games tough to crack.

      For movies, you might have to go to the theater--with digital cinema, there's no need for a movie to ever end its run. "When's it coming out on DVD/Blu-ray?" Never! The trend for cineplexes to have larger numbers of smaller viewing rooms could extend to the point where you would go and rent a living-room sized theater for the night and watch whatever you want.

    3. Re:It really looks like the prosecution will fail by MBGMorden · · Score: 1

      No matter how hard they push though, or even if TPB gets shut down, other servers will spring up in other countries, not all of which really give a damn about this sort of thing. What they don't get is that they really AREN'T doing anything but indexing. Whether or not that makes a difference on the legal side, it most certainly DOES make a difference on the technical side, and the bandwidth needs of just the torrent tracker are much lower than if they were sending files themselves. For a while my ISP blocked access to trackers for example (but did nothing to the bitorrent p2p communications), and I simply routed my tracker communications through a paid (but cheap) proxy server. My bandwidth usage each month for that, despite downloading gigabytes of torrent content, was neglible.

      --
      "People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
  22. Shh, don't tell anyone by GiantRobotMonster · · Score: 0

    Seriously, can't we just round up all of the lawyers, executives, and directors and just fucking kill them already?

    Shh, don't tell anyone, but it's all under control. That's what climate change is for. We're gradually raising the temperature of the planet until all the lawyers, executives, directors, used-car-salesman, boy-bands, etc all decide to build a giant spaceship and leave. Once they're gone, we'll set it back to where it was. We tried starting a rumour about the planet being in danger of being eaten by a mutant star goat, but it didn't take.

    1. Re:Shh, don't tell anyone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We tried starting a rumour about the planet being in danger of being eaten by a mutant star goat, but it didn't take.

      Don't you think you should tell the scientologists?

  23. Re:Ah, I see by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  24. Nailor by Nailor · · Score: 5, Informative

    The prosecutor dropped half of the charges because he had misunderstood the behaviour of the BitTorrent. The half of the charges were about making pirated copies.

    This however still leaves, as the TFA states, the charges about 'assisting in making available'. This also does not affect the claims of the stakeholders, they are still "valid". Also the maximum possible sentence is still the same.

    Swedish prosecutor has been really careful with this case and propably doesn't want to risk the case with false charges. All the tracker files provided by stakeholders as the files downloaded are carefully selected. They even have listed every IP met using those .torrent files and made sure that every one of those has a Swedish IP among them. The prosecutor is also careful in using any previous cases against torrent tracker (for example Finnreactor case in Finland).

    A Finnish lawyer Mikko Välimäki has made a blog post about the case (Google translation, original is here)

    1. Re:Nailor by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 1

      The prosecutor dropped half of the charges because he had misunderstood the behaviour of the BitTorrent.
      ...
      Swedish prosecutor has been really careful with this case and probably doesn't want to risk the case with false charges.

      I don't see how you can make that conclusion based on your premise. After all, didn't the prosecutor just spend an entire year getting ready for this case? How could he have such a fundamental misunderstanding if he was "really careful?"

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    2. Re:Nailor by plasmacutter · · Score: 1

      Google translations of any foreign text over junior high level are about as accurate and lucid as a -1 slashdot post.

      Care to provide a synopsis of what this guy is actually saying.

      --
      VLC FOR MAC IS DYING! IF YOU DEVELOP, PLEASE SAVE IT!!
    3. Re:Nailor by Nailor · · Score: 1

      Main points were covered in my post, as the Google translation is quite inaccurate.

      Other points worth of mentioning:

      - Writer compares the case with the Finnish Finnreactor case, where all evidence was collected by National Bureau of Investigation (referred as KRP in article), a Finnish police unit and where the evidence was not that clear and the whole case was about making illegal copies, even though the same BitTorrent was used. IIRC, the writer was defending attorney in that case.
      - NBI in Finland didn't download a single torrent opposite to this case where all torrents used in the case were downloaded, IPs recorded and the data behind the torrent verified to be what it was said to be.
      - Prosecutor avoids stating that the accused participated in the actual file sharing. Prosecution is only interested in the assisting in making available.
      - All the stakeholders have agreed with the prosecutor that the case is not about making copies, only about assisting in making available.

    4. Re:Nailor by Nailor · · Score: 1

      I don't see how you can make that conclusion based on your premise. After all, didn't the prosecutor just spend an entire year getting ready for this case? How could he have such a fundamental misunderstanding if he was "really careful?"

      Really careful as in leaving everything not certain outside the case and focusing on the parts where they have the best coverage. They don't want, as the linked (bad) translation of the blog post states, to risk losing even partially.

      Yes, I agree that the year worth of investigation should bring up what the BitTorrent is and what it is not, but that's an issue with the personnel, ie. the prosecutor and the investigation concluded by Swedish police, not really an issue in this case.

      It might even be that some of the alleged copying charges were originally pressed by the stakeholders, not the prosecutor

    5. Re:Nailor by Nailor · · Score: 1

      Turre Legal has another post about the subject, this time in English.

      This post focuses on differences between Finnish and Swedish trials.

    6. Re:Nailor by Ezel · · Score: 1

      Erhm. .? Huh?
      They didn't even KEEP the .torrent files you talk about as evidence. The defendants asked for a copy of the .torrent files and the prosecution said that they didn't keep the copies!

      They defendants also made a whole lot of fuss about how they prosecution could say that the IP-adresses were swedish. The answer can be digested down to "It resolves to *.telia.com damn it!" which totally don't prove that the IP-adresses were in sweden at all.

      --
      Prosp long and liver.
  25. Re:Go Pirate Gay!!!1! by jgtg32a · · Score: 1

    yeah as long as the files inside the torrent are visible then people can select what part of the file they actually want to download.

  26. Since they don't like linking either... by Kjella · · Score: 4, Funny

    ...I can't wait for my lawsuit for linking to assisting making available.

    --
    Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    1. Re:Since they don't like linking either... by badzilla · · Score: 2, Funny

      Hahahahaha you're FU... oh wait, now I'm guilty of Replying To Linking To Assisting To Making Available

      --
      "Don't belong. Never join. Think for yourself. Peace." V.Stone, Microsoft Corporation
    2. Re:Since they don't like linking either... by houghi · · Score: 1
      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    3. Re:Since they don't like linking either... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Go ahead, mod it funny, they'll get you for modding up linking to assisting making available.

    4. Re:Since they don't like linking either... by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Gosh, now you screwed me as well, you insensitive clod! See, my WP user page links to my /. profile, which of course has that list of comments with links to them, and I happened to post a comment in this discussion, and the comment of course has the link to the discussion it's in... so now my WP profile - which I've authored - links to illegal content. All because of you! I'm reporting your illegal to RIAA and BSA immediately, hopefully that would help cut down my prison term by a year or two for cooperation... ~

    5. Re:Since they don't like linking either... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You wouldn't get a lawsuit, that's the whole point. Slashdot would get a lawsuit for assisting linking to assisting making available.

    6. Re:Since they don't like linking either... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      --...I can't wait for my lawsuit for linking to assisting making available [thepiratebay.org].

      And I can't wait for my lawsuit for quoting linking to assisting making available. And sue my ISP for transmitting quoting linking to assisting making available while you're at it.

  27. Re:Ah, I see by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  28. Don't post when you can't think straight.... by Nailor · · Score: 2, Funny

    Just a reminder to myself not to post when I can't think straight. Imagine a better topic for the previous post, other than my nick. :)

    1. Re:Don't post when you can't think straight.... by Skye16 · · Score: 1

      I was wondering about that as I was reading it.

      "Nailor? I hardly know her!"

  29. Re:Go Pirate Gay!!!1! by tnk1 · · Score: 4, Funny

    Yes, your honor, I didn't download all of that software. I specifically avoided downloading the trojan that the packager slipped in.

    Case dismissed!

  30. Beware, Google! You're NEXT! by Chris+Tucker · · Score: 4, Funny

    "Your Honor, The Engulf and Devour Media Conglomerate, er, I mean, The PEOPLE'S exhibit A:

    A Google Screenshot , illustrating how Google facilitates the infringement of copyright and assists in making available these copyrighted files to immoral and unconscionable thieves like THEM!"

    (Prosecutor inadvertently points towards jury box. Hilarity Ensues!)

    --
    Guaranteed! This comment 100% Anthrax free!
    1. Re:Beware, Google! You're NEXT! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why not link directly to the torrent files that Google keeps lying around?

    2. Re:Beware, Google! You're NEXT! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Your Honor, The Engulf and Devour Media Conglomerate, er, I mean, The PEOPLE'S exhibit A:

      A Google Screenshot , illustrating how Google facilitates the infringement of copyright and assists in making available these copyrighted files to immoral and unconscionable thieves like THEM!"

      (Prosecutor inadvertently points towards jury box. Hilarity Ensues!)

      You may feel cleaver, but the reality is that google does indeed censor a lot of search results simply to avoid this type of legal backlash.

      It used to be rather nice to have a choice of search engine, as you could 'shop around' and get a lot of results censored or ignored by one engine. Now the eggs are pretty much all in the same basket.

  31. That's not how this system works by MoellerPlesset2 · · Score: 5, Informative

    That's not how the Swedish/Scandinavian/German legal system works.

    It's a different legal philosophy. The Anglo-American system works essentially by contrasting two alternate realities,
    the prosecutor's version of events versus the defendant's version of events, and the trial is a decision between the two.

    In this legal system, the prosecution and defendants work towards a sort of common reality. Along the way, arguments and evidence gets dropped until they're left with essentially the minimum of differences. *Then*, at the end, the prosecutor formally demands they be sentenced for whatever they think they can reasonably get.

    It's common and completely normal in that way for charges to be changed, dropped or added during the trial. It's what remains at the end that matters, not what they were demanding at the start.

    Also, district attorneys in Sweden are not elected officials, and a D.A. career is not viewed as a stepping-stone into a political one. So Swedish prosecutors aren't anywhere near as interested in media attention as American ones are.

    1. Re:That's not how this system works by TheGratefulNet · · Score: 4, Insightful

      it sounds like your system has some intelligence built into it. ...pity OURS is borked, so to speak.

      --

      --
      "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
    2. Re:That's not how this system works by RabidMoose · · Score: 1

      In the (Swedish) criminal justice system, the people are represented by two separate yet equally important groups: The police, who investigate crime, and the district attorneys (who are not elected officials), who prose... come to an agreement with the offenders. These are their stories.

      Please let there be a Sweedish Law & Order.

    3. Re:That's not how this system works by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But but... USA has the best justice system in the world! I know this! I saw American lawyer movie (or perhaps a show) in which the lawyer said so. And I can either believe you, mister internet person, or a lawyer who got on television!

    4. Re:That's not how this system works by davecb · · Score: 1

      Cool! I like that

      --dave

      --
      davecb@spamcop.net
    5. Re:That's not how this system works by mdmkolbe · · Score: 1

      How does the legal system accomplish that? Is it the structure of the court proceedings? Ingrained culture?

      I really am curious. It sounds nice, but I'm baffled how a court system with both prosecution and defense would not devolve into what you describe the Anglo-American system to be.

    6. Re:That's not how this system works by initialE · · Score: 1

      Nevertheless you have to admit that is case is very much political in nature - American politics more than Swedish though.

      --
      Starbucks, Harbuckle of Breath.
  32. And so does Target ... by ElSupreme · · Score: 1

    Hell Target makes available a lot of copyrighted works. I walk in, stuff my bag, then walk out. making available of copyrighted works What about that?

    --
    My addiction: Arguing with idiots. AKA Slashdot!
    1. Re:And so does Target ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Despite what many people on Slashdot believe, intentionally being obtuse and missing the point is not a valid legal defense.

  33. Re:Hooray? Well, maybe... by chill · · Score: 5, Funny

    Except that "making available" was thrown out in U.S. court. If they're convicted of "assisting making available" in Sweden it'll mean that the U.S. is the more liberal country and I don't think Sweden can live with that. No one in the E.U. would talk to them anymore.

    --
    Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
  34. Where does the degree stop? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    TPB isn't looking for copyright infringement. In fact, it's entirely possible that there is no infringement, remember, some sovereign states don't recognize copyrights that are not registered in the country (cf US copyright at the turn of the 19th century wrt Chuck Dickens). Such making available is not illegal.

    1. Re:Where does the degree stop? by pdabbadabba · · Score: 1

      OP assumed that TPB was making available infringing works for the sake of his argument. I did likewise in order to properly respond. That is all.

    2. Re:Where does the degree stop? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Of course they are. They're called THE PIRATE BAY.

  35. Re:Go Pirate Gay!!!1! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    Only if the files come from the EVIL FASCIST MEDIA INDUSTRY. In that case, we're all in favor of piracy. We all have a right to watch movies and play games for free. Go Pirate Bay! You're fighting for our freedom!

    But if the files are GPL software, then of course we object to the vicious and unwarranted theft of our valuable intellectual property. GPL violators are evil, lazy, workshy programmers who think they have the right to use everything for free. Lock up the evil pirates to safeguard our freedom!

  36. regarding being pleased.. by arikol · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Ok, it would be nicer for this to work on ideals than technicalities. But the fact that the half the prosecutions case is based on them not understanding what is going on makes it likely that their understanding of the rest of the case may be a bit shaky as well.

    If that is the case they are going to screw up nicely in the next few days, which is what I feel is most likely.

    In Iceland the opposite happened (well, not really. The prosecution didn't know anything but the torrentsite operator didn't defend himself well enough) and now Iceland is one of those places where no search engine or data collection system wants a home base.

    These people really don't think of the consequences. Studies show that piracy does not cut into profit margins in any significant way (Canadian government study being notable), which correlates with entertainment industry growth following economic trends and not increase in piracy efficiency.

  37. Would someone please post by jitterman · · Score: 1

    Would someone please post a torrent file linking to video of the trial?

    --
    For conscience is the wound, and there's naught to staunch it
    1. Re:Would someone please post by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We can only get audio (and sketches).

  38. When... by BronsCon · · Score: 1

    Will PB sue the RIAA for "assisting making available"?

    --
    APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
  39. Heads will roll... by Xest · · Score: 1

    and the internets shall lol as the music industry finally finds out in the most publicly embarassing way possible that they can't actually do anything to stop piracy.

    From TFA:

    ""EPIC WINNING LOL," Peter himself later commented on Twitter."

    Gotta love their high spirits despite all the crap being thrown at them but I'd imagine it's a hell of a relief seeing the music industry's case pretty much gutted on only the second day.

    What's interesting from the BBC article is this:

    "In fact it simplifies the prosecutor's case by allowing him to focus on the main issue, which is the making available of copyrighted works."

    I find that an impressively naive comment as they haven't made anything available- that should be even easier to defend than "assisting copyright infringement" although from what I understand, despite the music industry just blatantly suggesting they're making available the actual charge is "assisting making available" which is somewhat different. If the latter is indeed the actual charge then I guess we're back to them just defending the fact that assisting making available isn't actually any kind of crime in Sweden.

    Still one might hope the fact that their initial main charge has been obliterated that this might put the brakes on any hopes of sympathy for the remaining charge also.

  40. LOVE swedish by unity100 · · Score: 1

    we need more of those people on this planet.

    1. Re:LOVE swedish by Hyler · · Score: 1

      We're working on it. Send more women.

      XOXO,
      Sweden

      --
      It's its. They're their, there. You're your. Who's whose? A looser loser, though those two too threw through the trough.
  41. Re:Go Pirate Gay!!!1! by MightyYar · · Score: 2, Insightful

    We support the theft of intellectual property here, right?

    Actually, I support changing the law so that copyright law only governs commercial use. But simplify that to any way that makes me evil if you like.

    --
    W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
  42. Anyone else think.... by nnnich · · Score: 1

    that these trials are just a precursor/warm-up for the riaa to take on torrent and tracker sites hosted here in the US?

    or is there something I'm not understanding about law?

    anyways, I like a good conspiracy as much as the next guy, just.... not as much as david icke....

    --
    she was the daughter of a wealthy florentine pogen read em and weep was her adjustable slogan
    1. Re:Anyone else think.... by Hatta · · Score: 1

      Who in the hell is dumb enough to run a tracker located in the US?

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
  43. The prosecutor didn't prepare his case by Lagurz · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The prosecutor in this case (Hakan Roswall) is Sweden's most experienced and knowledgeable prosecutor when it comes to cases involving Intellectual property rights. It looks like he didn't do his homework before entering the court house. He has been working on this case for more than three years and after one day in court he realized that TPB does not copy any files at all.

    I think he felt a little embarrassed after this.

  44. Ob: "Fixed that for you" reply by mdielmann · · Score: 1

    You're not suggesting that journalists actually do this "research" stuff and produce "informed articles" any more are you???

    --
    Sure I'm paranoid, but am I paranoid enough?
  45. Liberal vs. Social Democrat by jonaskoelker · · Score: 1

    it'll mean that the U.S. is the more liberal country and I don't think Sweden can live with that.

    Repeating back what I've heard here on slashdot, Sweden is pretty big on the socialist (scary!) welfare (more scary!) state.

    I don't think they'd mind if the U.S. is considered more right-wing. I mean liberal.

    Oh well, at least I didn't contradict myself, seeing how I'm outside the U.S. ;-)

    (tongue-in-cheek-'ly-pointing-out-the-obvious-'ly yours...)

  46. Half the Charges by b4upoo · · Score: 1

    These charges were dropped because they were false and they were a bluff. But you can bet that the law will make no effective provision for people falsely charged making any substantial, financial recovery.

  47. TPB * by jonaskoelker · · Score: 1

    Why would slashdot be interested in the competency of the prosecution?

    Slashdot wants TPB to win so we don't have to switch over and use isohunt instead ;-)

  48. Re:HOORAY! by Dtyst · · Score: 1

    Obviously millions of users agree with Slashdot. Can millions of downloaders be wrong? In the end the users are the ones doing it, NOT the torrent sites. And for your information, copyright infringement happened before torrents. Additionally in Finland (where I live) we have a private copying remuneration system, so I have already paid for my downloads: http://www.hyvitysmaksu.fi/Teosto/hymysivut.nsf/wpages/index_en.html

  49. Re:HOORAY! by E+IS+mC(Square) · · Score: 2, Informative

    If the artists are represented by RIAA, movies by MPAA and writers by Author's Guild, I have no moral problem with piracy. But at the same time, all the files I have on my computers are from legal source - CDs (older) and amazon.com (newer).

    I believe its good news because TPB prosecution stinks of corporate thuggery. And at the same time, RIAA and their ilk are going after innocent people with countless cases filed every year. They do not deserve anything out of this.

  50. Re:Hooray? Well, maybe... by jamstar7 · · Score: 1

    Except that "making available" was thrown out in U.S. court. If they're convicted of "assisting making available" in Sweden it'll mean that the U.S. is the more liberal country and I don't think Sweden can live with that. No one in the E.U. would talk to them anymore.

    I'm thinking if that charge flies in Sweden, American prosecutors will use it in American courts by saying 'Hey, the most liberal country on the planet thinks it's a problem. What's wrong with us??'

    --
    Understanding the scope of the problem is the first step on the path to true panic.
  51. Re:AWESOME! by plasmacutter · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The RIAAs' heroes, congress, are going to get away with it! The RIAA deserves to deny software and electronics developers their rights to manufacture and sell their own IP, deny individuals their fair use and due process rights, and to strangle our tech sector to death to defend their obsolete business model.

    I join the RIAA in cheering the DMCA, and hope acta will add the right for the RIAA's government stooges to steal my computer or ipod, and kick me off the internet for a year on a mere accusation.

    Corporate execs who can't adapt destroying the economy and the fundamental principles of the free world. What's not to love?

    --
    VLC FOR MAC IS DYING! IF YOU DEVELOP, PLEASE SAVE IT!!
  52. They ain't pretty by SmallFurryCreature · · Score: 1

    Trust me, pretty doesn't even get a look in, but they make up for it in rabidness.

    --

    MMO Quests are like orgasms:

    You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.

    1. Re:They ain't pretty by lightversusdark · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Funnily enough, one of the most technically competent lawyers the BBC has in this field is a hot blonde!

      Seriouspost.

      --
      "There is nothing nice about Steve Jobs and nothing evil about Bill Gates." - Chuck Peddle
    2. Re:They ain't pretty by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pics or she doesn't exist.

    3. Re:They ain't pretty by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      seconded.

  53. In canada linking was found NOT to be illegal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Thus what the pirate bay is being sued for if they were in canada would have walked off on all cahrges
    see http://www.p2pnet.net/ WHO WON the CASE.

  54. Or to use the burglar anology by SmallFurryCreature · · Score: 1

    This is the case of wether taking stuff left outside a house for trash is considered stealing or not. once the courts have ruled one way or another that is the new law. IF the courts rule that taking stuff left outside is NOT stealing then nobody can ever be charged for that act again.

    --

    MMO Quests are like orgasms:

    You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.

  55. Yes, what part of this don't you understand. by SmallFurryCreature · · Score: 1

    The car companies don't speed. Nooo, they are just allowing people to speed themselves.

    The gun companies don't kill. Nooo, they are just allowing people to kill each other.

    --

    MMO Quests are like orgasms:

    You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.

  56. We don't anyway by SmallFurryCreature · · Score: 1

    We just look at their boobies and try to get them to translate the swedish chef.

    --

    MMO Quests are like orgasms:

    You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.

    1. Re:We don't anyway by chill · · Score: 1

      This, sir, is the best argument for EU membership that I have heard so far! Nordic babes and muppets!

      --
      Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
  57. Simple Solution by avajcovec · · Score: 1

    thepiratelibrary.org

  58. A do-over would be a waste of time. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    > Similarly, since TPB are certainly not going to stop linking to torrents, if they are acquitted here due to technical flaws in the prosecution's evidence, then they can't be charged again over those particular torrents - but new ones are published every day, and the prosecution could try again with a different set of specific torrents, and with more complete evidence.

    They've spent three years gathering this evidence. If it's not complete enough by now, they're going to be wasting their time doing this again without some change in Swedish law.

  59. Re:Go Pirate Gay!!!1! by cbiltcliffe · · Score: 1

    Don't know about other torrent clients, but uTorrent lets you do this. It'll list all the files in the download, and you can select which ones you want to get.

    --
    "City hall" in German is "Rathaus" Kinda explains a few things......
  60. Re:Go Pirate Gay!!!1! by cbiltcliffe · · Score: 1

    There's a simple solution to this apparent contradiction.

    "Information should not be locked up."
    If you lock up our GPL software in any way, you're evil.
    If you lock up your music and movies, you're evil.

    Is it 100% practical in every case? No, but it's certainly not the opposite ends of the spectrum like you insinuate.

    --
    "City hall" in German is "Rathaus" Kinda explains a few things......
  61. Re:Go Pirate Gay!!!1! by Barny · · Score: 1

    "I will furthermore point out to the court that the defendant agreed to the modified EULA they clicked through and were thus legally required to install my clients trojan and not doing so by removing it from an encrypted file is a violation not only of the contractual agreement that is the EULA but also a violation of the DMCA"

    Share and enjoy :)

    --
    ...
    /me sighs
  62. Re:AWESOME! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  63. This is the Analogy Police. by thewils · · Score: 1

    Enough already!

    --
    Once I was a four stone apology. Now I am two separate gorillas.
  64. and so it goes... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And so the story goes of old farts trying to protect the old record industry...

  65. If The Pirate Bay is guilty, so is Google by Joce640k · · Score: 1

    TPB is just a specialized version of Google. I can find more torrents via Google than I can via TPB.

    --
    No sig today...
    1. Re:If The Pirate Bay is guilty, so is Google by Shados · · Score: 1

      Laws on this differ from countries to countries, and this is definately not in my country, so I wouldn't know... but quite a few laws in developed countries have clauses related to "intent". And when you're called "The pirate bay", and you go around screaming that you're untouchable and that your ways will go on, its pretty clear what your intent is.

      Now, if that matters at all in this case is another story, but there IS a huge difference between Google and TPB.

    2. Re:If The Pirate Bay is guilty, so is Google by stonewallred · · Score: 1

      I use google to search TPB, because TBP search functions suck.Guess google gets sued next for assisting me in my quest to find torrents on TPB.

  66. Re:HOORAY! by Sj0 · · Score: 1

    Yeah, Those torrent sites are horrible. Don't they know it's the publisher's job to fuck the artists?

    --
    It's been a long time.
  67. Funny you say that. by jotaeleemeese · · Score: 1

    There is a Law & Order spin off coming to the UK...

    --
    IANAL but write like a drunk one.
  68. But not an UNLICENSED copy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Since some places allow the copying without license. Some have a license already ("This DVD is licensed for home use only..."). Other items are seeded by request of the copyright holder.

    Just as a Book KNOWS that some of its people are borrowing, copying and returning audio CDs, they don't stop it.

  69. Good News Everyone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Assisting making available is the vaguest law known to man.

    Intent won't be hard to prove what with the name of the site, the legal threats section, etc. Then again maybe intent doesn't play such a big part in Swedish Law as elsewhere.

    Regardless, here's hoping for a progressive pirate-happy outcome!

  70. Zombie governments Re:Google, Microsoft and Yahoo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Brains too assists in 'making available'.

    Frigging zombie governments need a culling soon.

  71. MakeOpEd.lhs by Hurricane78 · · Score: 1

    Use your brain. ;)

    Think of a set of sections, paragraphs for every paragraph of a section, and sentences for every sentence of a paragrap
    Then you can run a function which randomly or from some seed value selects which sentences and paragraphs go into the paragraphs and sections.
    In fact, this comment is a Haskell program to do exactly this. (Of course, in reality, the Picker type would be "[a] -> IO a".)

    Damn Slash. I got a "Filter error: Please use fewer 'junk' characters.". Apparently non-circumventable.
    So yo can grab the original from here: http://pastebin.com/f22167cc9

    Maybe to me this is so obvious because I'm a programmer. But I think, if one regularly uses a computer, one should know how to automate such things. Not nessecarily in Haskell though. ;)

    --
    Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
  72. that doesnt work that way by unity100 · · Score: 1

    we need blondes. you have to find a way to create more swedish women.

    now that you mention it, world also needs more swedish women.

  73. Pirate Bay Op Ed by mrraven · · Score: 1

    The new Brittany Spears is teh suck. 320 LAME mp3

    --
    Tired of all the isms, don't exploit people as an employer, or a government, mmmmK?
  74. So, how do you differentiate this from Google? by sleeplesseye · · Score: 1

    Given that you can go to Google and do searches capable of finding thousands of illegal mp3s, how do you differentiate sites like Google from The Pirate Bay? Is it their claim similar to that used against Napster, where the prior statements of the site -- and in particular, its name -- were an incitement to illegal behavior on the part of others? If so, couldn't someone else legally operate a Pirate Bay clone, so long as they make a point of never getting close to advocating illegal downloads, or perhaps even specifically warning people not to do so?

  75. Sony has goodwill? by Cathbard · · Score: 1
    "Sony says they have suffered many lost sales, suffered damage to their goodwill and other damages to their market."

    Sony have goodwill? With who? I'm not surprised people would rather get their music via TPB than Sony. Getting it from Sony hasn't worked out that well in the past now has it. Rootkit anybody? So who exactly is the criminal?

    --
    "A cynic is what an idealist calls a realist" - Sir Humphrey Appleby