Pirate Bay Founder Begs For Hacker Ceasefire

Barence writes "Pirate Bay's co-founder has pleaded for hackers to stop attacking the sites of those organizations lined up against him. Peter Sunde is on trial with Pirate Bay's three other founders for allegedly distributing copyrighted material. The trial is about to enter its fourth day, and in a gesture of support for the four men hackers have begun assaulting plaintiff websites, beginning with that of the The International Federation of the Phonographic Industry. The campaign has caused concern in the Pirate Bay camp, prompting Sunde to write a post titled 'We're winning, stop hacking, please' on his blog."

Comments

With friends like these...

[Arancaytar]

Who needs enemies, eh? :P

Re:With friends like these...

[ShieldW0lf]

Cease fire means stop for now because good may come of it, but if it doesn't, the victor is usually the one who strikes first and hard at the end of the cease fire while the enemy is adjusting their shit.

Or that's my understanding of it, anyways...

Re:With friends like these...

[Moryath]

The unfortunate reality is that, depending on what happens, this could conceivably be construed as either (a) evidence of bad faith (which courts really don't like) or (b) an attempt to intimidate plaintiffs or plaintiff witnesses, which would be a MAJOR problem for the defense (who would then be under the gun to prove total noninvolvement).

Remember: all it takes is one trumped-up charge to slip past the court/jury to make things go down the shitter.

Re:With friends like these...

[adamchou]

IANAL, but I would imagine that the plaintiff would need to first prove that the assaults on their site are being caused by the defendant, not the other way around.

Re:With friends like these...

[Moryath]

And this is why you are not a lawyer.

Merely raising the accusation colors perceptions of the defendants. That's why (whenever possible) the defense tries to get their client dressed up in a nice suit and tie, rather than his dailywear, and tries to get him in with a shave/trim to the beard and hair rather than having it look wild and crazy.

All it takes is one lawyer standing up in front of the jury and saying "and we believe Mr. X's co-conspirators are responsible for attacking our business website..." and it doesn't matter what comes after. People tend to remember the first thing they are told and assign it higher value than any counterargument, as shown by many, many psychological studies. That biases the jury and judge and makes the case harder to win.

Re:With friends like these...

[Anonymous Coward]

Merely raising the accusation colors perceptions

Way back when I was in law school, my criminal law prof used this example to demonstrate the power of accusation (this in the "innocent until proven guilty" category of things):

How many of you, when you see a cop car go by with someone in the backseat, think "hmmm ... I wonder why that innocent person is in the backseat of a police car?" How many of you think "I wonder what he did?"

Re:With friends like these...

[adamchou]

This is bullshit if anyone is not a lawyer it is you.

thank you, my point exactly

now IANAL but i know how it work's, i seen them on TV

LOL

Re:With friends like these...

[Anthony_Cargile]

IANAL either, but wouldn't his blog post (a public statement) alone be at least some good faith towards disproving that the attacks were not by them? Even if the jury would not regard any counter-argument as highly as the original argument (and the "we're winning" part might just piss them off, frankly), it would at least look good on their part for not being the hackers in question, err, possible question (?).

Re:With friends like these...

[M1rth]

sustained - jury will disregard

ROFLMAO, if you think that a jury actually DOES disregard things like that, you're a loon.

Re:With friends like these...

[russotto]

ROFLMAO, if you think that a jury actually DOES disregard things like that, you're a loon.

Which is why the judge should make up some stuff to balance things out.

"Jury will disregard that remark, and also the allegation that witness for the prosecution was seen fucking a goat."

Re:With friends like these...

[anactualfemale]

I generally assume that people are usually arrested for little to no reason. I know sometimes that's not the case, but I live in a rural area. My experience with cops has led me to conclude that they are just bullies, and they harass people just out of boredom. The job seems to attract only people who are belligerent, aggressive, opportunistic and nasty. When I see someone in the back of a cop car, I feel a pang of sympathy.

Re:With friends like these...

[Meneguzzi]

I would just like to point out that you are all assuming a common law legal system (i.e. the system used by England and it's former colonies), which has a jury in most cases. That is not the case with Sweden (and in fact, in most countries in the world), which uses Roman civil law, which is much less prone to the whims of a jury (although it suffers from other problems).

Cease fire

[jetsci]

"Cease fire boys, we got 'em where we want 'em!" Reminds me of my old Staff. Sergeant. Even if TPB wins, I imagine this will change the front of file-sharing once again and new technology will emerge. I'm just curious what it will be...

Re:Cease fire

[Muad'Dave]

Staffordshire, in England. Stiff upper lip, and all that. Known for it's particularly fierce Sergeants, much like Nepal is known for its Gurkhas, and for its Bull Terriers.

Re:Cease fire

[Kagura]

"Cease fire boys, we got 'em where we want 'em!"

... surrounded from the inside!

Re:Cease fire

[tacarat]

What's "Staff." short for?

In the military, like most jobs, the staff is always short for funding or recruiting reasons.

Re:Cease fire

[meringuoid]

Staffordshire, in England. Stiff upper lip, and all that. Known for it's particularly fierce Sergeants, much like Nepal is known for its Gurkhas, and for its Bull Terriers.

What's a Nepalese Bull Terrier like?

Re:Cease fire

[0xygen]

For the majority of torrent traffic out there, I think we're safe to assume most people are not personal friends with aXXo, RELOADED, Fairlight, Outlaws, KLAXXON, etc etc.

I see Microsoft are already trying to get market share on your idea though... http://tech.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/02/19/1822236

Re:Cease fire

[exp(pi*sqrt(163))]

In the right sauce, tastes just like chicken.

Re:Cease fire

[edittard]

What's a Nepalese Bull Terrier like?

Same as any other dog - biscuits, slow cats and the taste of its own genitals.

Re:Cease fire

[daveime]

Aww come ON !!!

We need to be able to mod to +10 Funny ... had me in stitches this one.

Boo, This is Court! More Theatrics!

[Anonymous Coward]

"We're winning, stop hacking, please"

I would prefer something more theatrical such as:

Does it please the court to know that my hand has stayed the executioner's sword from the neck of the prosecution?

Shouldn't affect the case

[aliquis]

I can see how this can affect the general opinion against them but it shouldn't affect the case as such should it?

Law is law and different opinions or not agreeing with someone else is a totally different thing.

Understandable how he wants to play nice though.

Re:Shouldn't affect the case

[SpeedyDX]

It depends on the individual judge. Normally, of course, judges supposed to look at all the evidence and arguments presented, the relevant case law, and use those as the bases for their decision. They do, however, sometimes come up with a decision based on their own biases, then try to work their way backwards and come up with reasons to support their decision. Sometimes it is evident when this type of situation occurs, but you can never really be sure.

In this case, if the children - err, sorry, hackers - continue their unnecessary and foolhardy assault on these organizations' sites, it may prompt the judge to look at the defendents in a harsher light than necessary. If criminals (or at the very least, immoral hackers) are backing TPB, then why is it a stretch to say that TPB has been assisting in some form of not-perfectly-legal activity?

I'm not saying this will happen for sure, nor am I saying that it is likely to happen. It is, however, a distinct possibility. The actions of these children - again, sorry, hackers - are putting TPB in a much more difficult situation than they need to be. They are shooting themselves in the foot, and taking TPB down with them.

Re:Shouldn't affect the case

[StikyPad]

Don't be an ass. Maybe his backspace key is fucked up -- oh, sorry, impaired -- or maybe his meatbeaters -- oh, sorry, hands -- are too weak -- again, sorry, atrophied -- to manipulate the larger -- oh, sorry, full figured -- key.

Re:Shouldn't affect the case

[mwvdlee]

Here's some twisted reasoning to consider:

- TPB claims not responsible for the illegal activities of others.
- TPB asks hackers to stop hacking TPB's opposition.
- Hackers obviously don't listen and continue hacking anyway.
- TPB has effectively proven they have no influence on the illegal activities of others ans as such cannot be held responsible.

Stop hacking please, nudge nudge wink wink

[MisterSquirrel]

Of course, as any decent hacker knows, "Stop hacking please" is just a l33t-speak code message for, "Keep up the good work"!

Re:Stop hacking please, nudge nudge wink wink

[etnoy]

Of course, as any decent hacker knows, "Stop hacking please" is just a l33t-speak code message for, "Keep up the good work"!

Actually, he wrote "We're winning, stop hacking plz", which is much more funny. He also wrote "EPIC WINNING LOL" on Twitter after the first round in the courtroom. And he's the press spokesperson for TPB, :)

Holy Shit!

[ericrost]

An actual link to a real blog instead of JUST the link to the no analysis ad revenue suckhole article.

Hacking these sites is futile

[Anonymous Coward]

Especially RIAA, IFPI, MPAA, et al. Aside from unnecessary negative publicity, taking down these static zero-hit sites accomplishes nothing. Immanuel Kant said it best, "If a site is hacked and no one visits the defaced page, can it be truly considered a hack?"

Suspicious

[Eudial]

One should be open to the possibility of IFPI "hacking" themselves to gain popular support. It is, after all, instant sympathy. It wouldn't be the first time something like this has happened.

Hacked by themselves?

[tigre]

Comments towards the end of TFA suggest the hackings may be sponsored by the IFPI/MPAA so as to make the Pirate Bay look bad. It would be amusingly absurd to see counter-hacking by TPB supporters keeping the "enemy" sites up.

Re:Hacked by themselves?

[RiotingPacifist]

hacker1: finally we got root!
hacker2: what i thought they were a windows box?
hacker1: not anymore, dos a load-balanced Lighttpd cluster bitches!

don't be a dumbass

[ArcSecond]

I find it amusing that the same mind that could be outraged at the prosection of "four innocent men... accused of copyright infringement" would then go on to say "we urge the public to boycott and lynch those responsible".

Boycott, sure. Protest, fine. Even a little creative vandalism is good. But lynching?

I would say someone has their priorities out of whack. Either they haven't thought this through or they are just *that* dumb that they would offer "support" to someone on trial by calling for violence against the plaintiffs.

I thought hackers were supposed to be ingenious and creative thinkers. Not the equivalent dumbass jocks on a rampage.

Re:don't be a dumbass

[furby076]

I thought hackers were supposed to be ingenious and creative thinkers. Not the equivalent dumbass jocks on a rampage.

Years of repression in highschool locker rooms by the sports jocks breeds creative thoughts of violence in the adult hacker community.

Re:don't be a dumbass

[D Ninja]

I thought hackers were supposed to be ingenious and creative thinkers. Not the equivalent dumbass jocks on a rampage.

I think it's interesting that "hackers" are supposed to be so much better/smarter than "dumbass jocks." Really, consider the comparison.

Dumbass jocks - Their turf is real life.
Hackers - Their turf is computers.

You get either group on their own turf, they're going to act very similar. Heck, all hackers and jocks are human, so, when put in the right situation, they're going to react similarly (ala Lord of the Flies). No reason to expect one group to be "better" than the other.

Re:don't be a dumbass

[Oktober Sunset]

a lynching is not very creative...

now if they had said, 'chop off thier balls and ram them down thier throats, then fileshare a recording of thier last moments as they die in pain, being sure to utilise dynamic range compression to make the sounds of them thrashing about in thier final moments before the lack of oxygen and blood loss kill them sound annoyingly louder than whatever was played immediately before it'

That would have been a start...

Re:don't be a dumbass

[Quothz]

This is me:

although I think the intellectual crowd tends to reach a (relatively) mature ethic earlier in life.

This ain't:

I'm curious as to what you mean by "ethic." My only remark is that, if you're part of the intellectual crowd, you may be bias.

Fair enough. As t'my bias, I'm the artistic type. I reckon I relate to the thinky types more closely than the jocks. And I was typing out of my ass, with no peer-type review backing me up. It's based entirely on my own observation and reflection.

As t'what I mean, I think the intellectual crowd, broadly speaking, tends to have a better understanding at a young age of how their actions affect others and a stronger sense of sympathy. That is, they seem to be less inclined to cause harm, and more likely to see any potential harm in their actions. That's far from universal, of course, but in a very broad, loose way, I do believe it's the case. Hey, when's the last time an academic fraternity or chess club got in trouble for hazing?

The Revolution Will Not Be Televised....

[Phoenixhawk]

It will however be available as a torrent :)

Its like Lafayette's plea to the french people

[unity100]

after 1789. to stop violence.

they liked him ( he is the lead of the group who worked on and wrote declaration of the rights of man ), respected him, but they were SO fed up with aristocracy and what they lived in their hands that noone heeded the pleas to stop violence against aristocrats.

its something like that. 3% of the population is trying to suppress 97% of the population like those times. 3% is the corporations and the i.p. industry, and 97%, the people, like the last time.

i dont need to remind you what happened after 1792.

Re:Its like Lafayette's plea to the french people

[Culture20]

i dont need to remind you what happened after 1792.

1793?

Re:Its like Lafayette's plea to the french people

[TheRaven64]

Gah! Can't you at least put a spoiler alert in your subject?

makes me wonder

[castironpigeon]

Why would hackers be targeting those sites now instead of hitting them 24/7/365? It's not like these organizations were good and then all of a sudden became evil when they brought TPB to court.

Besides, who really cares about their websites? If the hackers really wanted to get the job done then every employee of every one of those organizations would have nothing but goatse in their inbox from now until the day they resign.

Re:Boo, This is Court! More Theatrics!

[tacarat]

I'd mod you up strictly for my love of flowery bullshit phrasing.

trail of innocent people

[fermion]

What I found most interesting was the report that one defacement included a complaint that innocent people were on trail. I though the idea that only guilty people are tried was an United States philosophy, along with idea that defense lawyers sole purpose was to get the guilty off on technicalities.

In fact, as annoying as the trial is, this is how a court system should work. There is an ambiguity in law. The copyright owners believe that one is true, the Pirate Bay believes another thing is true. Rather than complaining that the process of justice is moving along, we should be thankful that we live in a world where somewhere such a process is available, and the Pirate Bay was not just summarily destroyed and the people involved were not just summarily fined to oblivion, which is what happens in America.

I hope that the rest of the world is not being infected with the meme of the court system as a tool of the criminal, because it is sure nice to have an place where a relatively impartial educated person can hear and adjudicate on legitimate differences of opinion.

Re:trail of innocent people

[QuantumG]

The copyright holders I keep hearing about continue to believe shit that has been struck down again and again. Apparently this case opened with a speech by the prosecution saying that the purpose of copyright was to ensure artists get paid and can control the use of their work. This has never been true and has been made abundantly clear by every court in the world that this is *not* the purpose of copyright. It exists solely to benefit the public in ways that a lack of copyright supposedly would not. As soon as the prosecution got up saying that shit the judge should have found him in contempt and thrown out the case. He's misleading the court and that shit should not be tolerated.

Re:trail of innocent people

[dissy]

It is in Sweden.
Why do you think such a tiny population has the second biggest music industry in the world -- incentives (who do you think produce all that crap Americans listen to).

I thought it came from China, like all the rest of our stuff ;P

Brilliant ploy

[TiggertheMad]

Another take on this is to let a wider sympathetic audience know that there is hacking going on. By giving more people the idea, they are probably insuring that a new wave of attacks on the plaintiffs' internet assets will occur.

By stating this as a plea to cease, they also get to claim that they have no control or involvement in any illegal hacking that is occurring. The can adopt the moral high ground and demonstrate that they are trying to curtail illegal activity being perpetrated by less savory individuals.

Well played, sir. Well played.

Sorry, cant have it both ways

[nurb432]

Either you support vigilante actions or you don't.

Fighting fire with fire....

[VinylRecords]

How many times has the MPAA or RIAA been linked with hiring hackers to DOS attack torrent websites or upload releases that contain viruses or malformed software in them?

RIAA hired hackers to infect P2P users and websites
http://www.dmwmedia.com/news/2003/01/15/riaa-denounces-claim-it-hired-hackers-to-attack-p2p-systems

TorrentSpy says MPAA paid man $15,000 to hack and disrupt TorrentSpy's network
http://www.afterdawn.com/news/archive/7583.cfm

The hackers are only responding appropriately in this case.

The Swedish government put The Pirate Bay in court and TPB responded appropriately by hiring lawyers and civilly appearing for trial.

The MPAA and RIAA hacked and disrupted P2P networks and so hackers fought back using the same exact methods.

Is hacking the MPAA or RIAA good? Not at all. But they started this nonsense both in and out of court with lawsuits and hiring people to illegally hack and disrupt networks.

Cui Bono?

[Pictish Prince]

The way I see it, the plaintiff saw half the charges being dropped on the first day, panicked, and then defaced their own site to drum up some sympathy, knowing that it would put TPB in a bad light.

Re:Good Christ....

[Skrapion]

What the GP is suggesting is a conspiracy theory, that the opponents to file sharing hired some hackers to attack their own sites, under the assumption that everybody will suspect TPB is behind the attack and that it will ruin TPB's credibility.

Now, I don't prescribe to this conspiracy theory, but the opponents to file sharing aren't as adverse to hiring hackers as you seem to think.

Bishop Berkeley, not Kant

[Mathinker]

Berkeley, not Kant.

The human mind is funny

[Moraelin]

The human mind is actually funny. We all think we can juggle multiple variables, and only look at the important, but the cruel (and proven by studies) reality is that everything gets dragged towards the value of "how much I like or dislike that guy on the whole." That overall opinion isn't an average of the individual and independently-evaluated values, but rather the other way around, a value that gets averaged into all the others.

It works equally well for:

- humans. If person X really likes person Z, the same personality traits will be given a big positive delta. "Yeah, he's outspoken, but we need people who call things as they are. And yeah, he finishes his projects later than other people, but he's a perfectionist and you can't rush quality. And maybe some bugs slip past his tests, but it's inevitable in this line of work." If person Y really hates Z, the same things get a big negative delta in their perception. "He's rude and lazy, and his programs are so buggy you have to wonder if he even tried starting them before committing in CVS." Which is why being the boss's best buddy actually works.

- companies and products. Fanboy flamewars are probably the best illustration of it at work. You see extreme deltas applied in their perception, so the same thing (which is probably not even important for anyone else) becomes pure perfection and even God couldn't have done it better to one camp, and the work of Satan to the other camp.

- games. E.g., see all the people who swore that everything about WoW is perfection when they liked it, and flipped to swearing that every single aspect or design decision is pure evil and only deluded idiots like it, when they eventually got bored of the game.

Etc.

Or to put it otherwise, there's a reason why everyone from Bill Gates to some obscure singer tries to whitewash their PR image, by means varying from posing as the great philanthropist (e.g., Bill Gates) to milking some compassion (e.g., Michael Jackson.) Because while we _should_ be evaluating the products based on their individual merits, liking the guy actually makes you like his products too, and hating him makes you find more faults in his products.

What I'm trying to get to is: judges and _especially_ juries should judge the facts independent of any other factors, but they're still humans like the rest of us. Many a case (again, especially when it involved a jury) ended up actually being judged by how well one likes the defendant, or by which lawyer is more charismatic.

So it's probably a good idea to avoid being perceived in some unsympathetic light, e.g., as "one of those evil hackers."

Who's next?

[ToNoTo13]

So, if they are found guilty, what's to stop "interest groups" from going after gun manufacturer's next saying that they are enabling criminals? And after that auto manufacturer's for enabling drunk drivers for after all without cars we wouldn't have drunk drivers. Whatever happened to personal responsibility and holding the actual criminals responsible for their actions?

I know...

[jonaskoelker]

With friends like these, who needs enemies, eh? :P

Canadians

The BitTorrent WILL put you in the driver's seat..

[jeko]

...but the Revolution will not be televised. It probably, however, will show up on YouTube on your iPhone. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UqWMmwH4p6w

Even when I was so incredibly young and fiercely stupid that I was living in Houston and voting Republican, I still had enough of an ear to smile at the voice behind that poem.

For you poor bastards who came of age during the time of Bush, here's a brother who suffered under the time of Nixon, by way of a Reagan victim.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Revolution_Will_Not_Be_Televised

The Revolution Will Not Be Televised
You will not be able to stay home, brother.
You will not be able to plug in, turn on and cop out.
You will not be able to lose yourself on skag and skip,
Skip out for beer during commercials,
Because the revolution will not be televised.

The revolution will not be televised.
The revolution will not be brought to you by Xerox
In four parts without commercial interruptions.
The revolution will not show you pictures of Nixon
blowing a bugle and leading a charge by John
Mitchell, General Abrams and Spiro Agnew to eat
hog maws confiscated from a Harlem sanctuary.
The revolution will not be televised.

The revolution will not be brought to you by the
Schaefer Award Theatre and will not star Natalie
Woods and Steve McQueen or Bullwinkle and Julia.
The revolution will not give your mouth sex appeal.
The revolution will not get rid of the nubs.
The revolution will not make you look five pounds
thinner, because the revolution will not be televised, Brother.

There will be no pictures of you and Willie May
pushing that shopping cart down the block on the dead run,
or trying to slide that color television into a stolen ambulance.
NBC will not be able predict the winner at 8:32
or report from 29 districts.
The revolution will not be televised.

There will be no pictures of pigs shooting down
brothers in the instant replay.
There will be no pictures of pigs shooting down
brothers in the instant replay.
There will be no pictures of Whitney Young being
run out of Harlem on a rail with a brand new process.
There will be no slow motion or still life of Roy
Wilkens strolling through Watts in a Red, Black and
Green liberation jumpsuit that he had been saving
For just the proper occasion.

Green Acres, The Beverly Hillbillies, and Hooterville
Junction will no longer be so damned relevant, and
women will not care if Dick finally gets down with
Jane on Search for Tomorrow because Black people
will be in the street looking for a brighter day.
The revolution will not be televised.

There will be no highlights on the eleven o'clock
news and no pictures of hairy armed women
liberationists and Jackie Onassis blowing her nose.
The theme song will not be written by Jim Webb,
Francis Scott Key, nor sung by Glen Campbell, Tom
Jones, Johnny Cash, Englebert Humperdink, or the Rare Earth.
The revolution will not be televised.

The revolution will not be right back after a message
about a white tornado, white lightning, or white people.
You will not have to worry about a dove in your
bedroom, a tiger in your tank, or the giant in your toilet bowl.
The revolution will not go better with Coke.
The revolution will not fight the germs that may cause bad breath.
The revolution will put you in the driver's seat.

The revolution will not be televised, will not be televised,
will not be televised, will not be televised.
The revolution will be no re-run brothers;
The revolution will be live.

Re:Boo, This is Court! More Theatrics!

[Arslan ibn Da'ud]

..but you decided to post instead. ...ducks...

It's a lose-lose situation

[gilgongo]

Most of me wishes TPB will wipe the floor with the vile scum that are the plaintiffs. But really, I know that if TPB win, things will just get worse as the plaintiffs will seek to defend their revolting monopolies in ever more extreme ways elsewhere. They'll be like Agent Smith: just bringing in more and more lawyers.

If TPB lose, then things will get even worse as file sharing is forced further into the darknet and whole cultures start to grow up effectively rejecting completely any moral regard for copyright in any form. The RIAA and the others have not a clue about how far things can go here, nor how damaging they will become in trying to prop up their failing business models.

And just in case anyone is tempted to say that I'm going over the top about being able to share my Pixies albums with strangers, let me assure them that they've missed the point by a mile.