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."

18 of 347 comments (clear)

  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 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.
    4. 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
    5. 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)

    6. 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.

    7. 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
    8. 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."
  2. 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.

  3. 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?

  4. 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.

  5. 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!
  6. 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.

  7. 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.
  8. 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?
  9. 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.
  10. 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."