Slashdot Mirror


Pirate Bay Shuts Down Tracker, Switches To Distributed Hash Table

think_nix writes "The Pirate Bay has shut down their BitTorrent tracker. Instead TPB is now using Distributed Hash Table to distribute the torrents. The Pirate Bay Blog states that DHT along with PEX (Peer Exchange) Technology is just as effective if not better for finding peers than a centralized service. The Local reports that shutting down the tracker and implementing DHT & PEX could be due to the latest court rulings in Sweden against 2 of TPB's owners, and may decide the outcome of the case."

10 of 327 comments (clear)

  1. Does this mean TPB will still be working? by Kirin+Fenrir · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Proving that technology is always one step ahead of copyright law.

    --
    Caffeine is my anti-drug!

    Duranin - A NWN2 Roleplaying Persistent World
  2. Still guilty by Rosco+P.+Coltrane · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So they go from hosting a tracker to hosting a bootstrap node that gives clients access to the DHT swarm? In short, in the eyes of the law (and probably of the general public), they're still facilitating the illegal distribution of copyrighted material. At the very least, they look guilty as hell, because they seem to do try their hardest to stick it up to da man.

    --
    "A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
    1. Re:Still guilty by purpledinoz · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Then aren't ALL ISPs also facilitating copyright infringement? Isn't Cisco providing the network technology for copyright infringement? Isn't Intel providing the ability for consumers to download illegal material from the Internet? Isn't AMAT, a semiconductor tool manufacturer, guilty of providing Intel with the tools to make microchips for copyright infringement?

    2. Re:Still guilty by L4t3r4lu5 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It's unfortunate that the quote I want to make right now ("The tree of Liberty...") comes from a founder of the very country which put such pressure on the Swedish government.

      I suppose the great always have further to fall.

      --
      Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
    3. Re:Still guilty by cfalcon · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Jefferson WAS a lawbreaker. He participated in a revolution. And the copyright in the constitution was designed to expire- unlike the one we have today, which is unconstitutional.

  3. Peer ants by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Pirates are like ants and always find a way around obstacles and tend to attract more pirates to use the same path.
    Removing a single tracker, no matter how widely used it was won't deal much harm. This may lead to the removal of other trackers in the future, but peer exhange and DHT are pretty much a good subsitute in my opinion.

    1. Re:Peer ants by dkleinsc · · Score: 5, Insightful

      In other words, the Internet is seeing copyright enforcement as damage and automatically routing around it.

      --
      I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/
  4. If DHT and PEX are by mehrotra.akash · · Score: 5, Insightful

    " just as effective if not better for finding peers", then why did they wait for the ruling to change over?
    why not just switch over a long time back??
    especially if they are better..

  5. Napster et al court cases... by nweaver · · Score: 5, Insightful

    One of the reasons why BitTorrent didn't suffer the legal fate of Napster, Kazaa, etc is that BitTorrent only handles data transfer, not search, and has significant noninfringing uses.

    Having trackerless torrents however doesn't help the noninfringing uses, only infringing uses. (If its non-infringing, just host a tracker damnit!), thus trackerless client features start to get very dangerous from a legal perspective for the developers.

    --
    Test your net with Netalyzr
  6. Re:In a related question by sopssa · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Is it illegal to download a list of instructions on which chunks to use ( and in what order ) to create a copyrighted work from your family photos? :)

    That's just the same old "but it's just random 0 and 1 on my hdd, it's not the movie, it just happens to have the same order in bytes!". No matter how you try to circumvent laws with stupid technical jargon, if it's clear you are or your intention is to violate copyright laws, you wont get far with such jargon.