Slashdot Mirror
Pirate Bay Court Loss Won't Stop the Flow of Files
Adrian Lopez writes "According to PC World, 'Hollywood may have won a battle, but the war against piracy is far from over. Unauthorized file sharing will continue (and likely intensify), if not through The Pirate Bay, then through dozens of other near identical swashbuckling Web sites. ... What Hollywood needs to remember is sites like The Pirate Bay are like weeds. When you try to kill one, they grow back even stronger. In this case, The Pirate Bay already moved most of its servers to the Netherlands, a move that could keep the site running even if The Pirate Bay loses its appeal.'"
Not sure that it was such a good idea moving the servers to Netherlands.
The local RIAA (BREIN), have been pretty successful in having the law 'bent' to their will and having various torrent sites closed down.
Even now they've announced that the want to block the Pirate Bay in Netherlands [link is in dutch]:
http://tweakers.net/nieuws/59677/brein-wil-na-vonnis-the-pirate-bay-in-nederland-laten-blokkeren.html
Rough translation: "Brein will use the guilty judgement against the Pirate Bay operators as a chance to try and convince the government to block Pirate Bay in Netherlands".
The current parliment act as if they're in the pockets of Brein, so I'm not sure why TPB thought it safe to put the servers here.
What we really need is some sort of decentralised torrent client.
Remember Napster? It was only good for people who listened to mainstream chart toppers with crappy sound quality. It was not an option for people really interested in music.
Maybe that's the case with legal Napster but the original "pirate's edition" had MP3s of all levels of quality and everyone was using it so of course you could find rare stuff.
Actually, the number is over 9000, literally.
5022 on 4/17/09
4067 on 4/18/09
and counting!
The creator of this post (Jacob Smith) hereby releases it, and all of his other posts, into the public domain.
Well we do know that you you use horrendous double-negative clauses and that you resort to insults at the drop of a hat. Oh, and that you resort to exaggerated strawmen to try and make a point. The GP said nothing about "gold-plated Bentleys' or being entitled to own them. The GP said that the majority of musicians struggle to get by on music alone and are ripped off frequently. That's pretty much true. Your nonsense sentence about gold-plated cars doesn't contradict the GP in the slightest.
So by your logic, if you had some advanced skills that you had perfected or trained for over time, e.g. you were an expert UNIX sysadmin, you should be paid the same as bar staff for your hourly rate. So by your logic, Paul McCartney who wrote the most popular song yet written ("Yesterday" is the most played song on radio worldwide) which he says came to him in a morning and was pretty much finished by the end of the day, should have been paid a flat daily rate for the time, perhaps about US$20. Something that has been covered 3,000 times and sold tens of millions of copies, right?
And you think that you yourself should be the arbiter of whether or not something is worth money or not? Because that's vital to your argument. If you don't think that you should be the judge of the value of everything, then you need to let people negotiate for themselves what prices to pay. That's called "buying and selling".
Not if you don't listen to their music or obtain their recordings, no, you don't. But if you don't then why do you care about others being against piracy - it's irrelevant to you. Unless of course you do listen to their music or want their recordings, in which case, yes, they have provided you with something you want and you have given nothing in return.
Yeah - "STFU". A real argument closer. You do realise that your instructions to what people can and can't say are irrelevant to them, yes? Someone takes something without the payment asked? Yeah - sounds like theft to me.
Aide-toi, le Ciel t'aidera - Jeanne D'Arc.
Hey. Why are the authors' summaries always so assimilated by the MS/Disney/RIAA mindset? Yes, there are some that assert that there are problems with specific torrents, but they (the complainers) and they (the disputed torrents) are not everybody, every country nor every torrent. Stop bleating the technology == piracy mantra spread by Bill and his minions.
There are plenty of legitimate downloads via the Pirate Bay, such as the CCC 25 presentations. P2P in general is full of legit traffic. Just last week, apt-p2p was mentioned, though is has been around a while longer -- long enough for HOWTO Forge to pick it up.
Beta is broken and the link to classic doesn't work. Stop wasting our time or there won't be anybody left here.
"Suddenly is was no longer possible for the monks to censor religious or political incorrect ideas."
You think? They may have lost some control over what was actually produced, but the Church and the State compensated for that by introducing draconian laws about things like heresy which effectively forced writers to self-censor. 1401, England, De Haeretico Comburendo - from this point on, heretics would be burned at the stake, which is exactly what happened to poor old William Tyndale when he dared to translate the Bible into English.
If you can't control the actual productions, all you need is to legislate against content you don't like and provide sufficiently harsh penalties for contravention. Plenty of states are still using this model - China, North Korea, Iran, etc.
A closed mouth gathers no foot.
Someone takes *a copy of* something without the payment asked?
There's a difference. I don't defend copyrighted file sharing (unless there's no way to legally obtain it), but it's *not* stealing.
Dilbert RSS feed