Slashdot Mirror
Ex-Pirate Bay Admin Launches Micropayment Service
spyrochaete writes "Peter Sunde, formerly 'brokep' of The Pirate Bay, recently launched a beta version of Flattr — a micropayment service enabling internet users to tender cash payments to any participating content publisher. Its model enables users to divvy monthly subscription fees as donations awarded to the musicians, bloggers, photographers, or other publisher of their choice.
Sunde tells the BBC, 'We want to encourage people to share money as well as content,' and asserts, 'people love things and they want to pay.'"
Sounds pretty nice as long as it doesn't commercialize things that are already free. I like it because you wouldn't think about each individual transaction since you pay a flat rate.
Connect the micro payment system to the torrents and any registered individual human parties that can prove identity and/or copyright ownership and is not big media.
This could give opportunity to actually pay the actual artists who want to get paid for the sharing that is going on. This should really serve to piss off the big media publishers who are essentially pimping the work of others for huge personal gain.
The good thing about this arrangement is that it will make it easier to donate money. It doesn't matter how many Flattr I click I still have the same cost, I do not have to keep track just to know I have the money on my account. I also don't have to take so many decisions, like how much to I think this song/game/application/book is worth or do I really going to enjoy it so it is worth anything at all, I just click.
So there are clear advantages of this arrangement. And I do not see it as a way to charge for a product, but as an alternative to the PayPal donate button.
The intro video doesn't say if it is possible to click multiple times on a Flattr button or pay larger chunks of "money", which would be needed if the scheme should be fair (blog post typed in a few minutes has a different value then a game that might have taken month or years to create).
Other then that, the scheme sounds quite good, as it is based around a flat fee, so you don't risk going bankrupt by clicking a few to many buttons and it also reduces the mental overhead that a normal payment would create.
Hi,
As far as I know Sunde has never been accused of pirating anything. ThePiratebay was and still is legal in Sweden.
Just because you can use their service to illegal distribute content does not make the creator a pirate. This would be the equivalent of calling the city a 'drunk driver' because it builds the streets that can be used to facilitate drunk driving.
The whole point of it is that it's flat rate, so it doesn't matter how many things you click you'll still pay the same, and this encourages people to spread their fixed fee around to all the places they like.
// MD_Update(&m,buf,j);
For example: If you have 5000 people a month visiting you and you get Flattr revenues from 1/4 of them between the amounts of $0.01 and $2, with the average being $0,25 you would net $312,5 each month. That's a decent help with the server & hosting bills. How many sites with Paypal donate buttons can claim similar figures? (I agree, my figures are just random figures, but not entirely unrealistic, given the proposed system)
Another counter argument I guess is "Will people use it?" .. that is anyone's guess, but I would totally put some money into the account and whenever I saw something interesting or worth supporting, I could put my money where my mouth is. This instead of saying "If only paypal wasn't so much of a hassle and require so big an investment to donate, I would help these guys". Imagine what this'll do to small pieces of free software, many of which die of neglect because of lack of incentive.
Lots of popular sites right now run on good will of the owner, some individual donations and ads. And in many cases ads that are not very benign in nature. This Flattr system seems to offer a way out of this. Hell, it could probably be expanded to be a payment system for fixed-size payments.. like "Click here to pay $1.99" -> Goto Flattr site to confirm -> Get authenticated as paid customer.
I guess it remains to be seen if this system is any good. But I don't expect it to fail on the willingness of people to pay.. if it fails it probably fails on lack of participating sites or problems on making a deposit. I will sure as hell give it a whirl.
I get that, but it seems arbitrary to me. I don't want to pay X$ for the sake of it, perhaps to ease the admin/banking hassle, or because the punters see it as a donation rather than a fee. Mostly though, I value some sites more than others, and I also don't want sites to get Y$ for 1 visit this month while getting the same for 200 visits next month.
Forget thrust, drag, lift and weight. Airplanes fly because of money.
The key here is to eliminate the role of the recording industry execs. In the digital age, the only real service they provide is marketing, and if you're already interested in paying money for someone's music, then those marketing services don't really add any value to the product you're paying for.
Aside from that, recording industry execs hinder creativity by stamping out cookie-cutter artists who are forced down the public's throat until they burn out in a blaze of drugs and/or stupidity. Music wants to be free (as in speech), and the recording industry is the single biggest obstacle to that.
This might explain why he was working with AES:
http://twitter.com/brokep/status/7915813818
"@niczar I clocked 12.8Gbps using AES 128 ECB on a dual quad 2.26ghz xeon with HT (= 16 cores). Not cost efficient."
http://twitter.com/brokep/status/7905751784
Is there a fast solution with a graphics card to do #AES within #Linux? I need 10Gbps or so realtime.
well I am one of the ones who wants to pay, just not that much and I don't want my computer getting fucked up by some DRM crap.
Take Fallout 3 for example, one of the buggiest games I have seen in a long time. Oblivion runs stable on my system but Fallout 3 will CTD 100% of the time at random times.
I would have been pissed if I had to fight with the retailer about returning this game. But I downloaded it so it was as simple as hitting the delete button and cursing at it for a sec.
Looks like I get the equivalent of a "keep it button", I like it.
I think if you have 200 visits on one site you can click 200 times the button to send money to that site, so that site will get a bigger chunk from the flat rate than other sites. At least this is my understanding of it...
Some other criminals of note: Sparticus; Jesus of Nazareth; Nelson Mandela.
yes, much safer to stick to a respectable banker... er wait...
This is so beautiful. It might be the first web service I truly, really like. It's in the right place at the right time. People, me included, love clicking "upvote" buttons all day long, because they like to show appreciation and it gives them a feeling of power. How much more meaningful this becomes when there's money attached! It will feel great to "flatter" people with some of your money, while never bothering to keep track of "how much you spend" (stressful, anyone will tell you), as it's a constant that you've decided you want to give out to the world for a month.
I don't know about you guys, but this fits my mental model of donations better than anything before. I think it'll catch on, because both providers and consumers will love it. We will move to a web with less crap. Maybe even reverse Sturgeon's law.
Pity that it's unlikely that anyone contracted to the major content distributors will be taking it up - I suspect the studios and publishers would bang that on the head. They (sic) like total control over the money flow.
Earlier this year when "well known musicians" came out to damn piracy - and it was covered by bbc, abc (Oz) and others I posted the suggestion (on those sites) that artists create a blog with a paypal account, so that people who download music and movies illegally (like me) could directly send the artists money. The posts were immediately pulled.
I (for one) welcome a New World Publishing Order - where the consumer determines the rewards for the artist/author/whatever, instead of the existing model where the studios/publishers tell the artist/author and the consumer "what market wants".
Just saying...
Under Swedish law, the verdict means absolutely nothing while they're going through the appeals process. In other words, they're still "innocent until proven guilty". Judging by the obvious bias of the judge in the initial case, I'd say they have a pretty good chance to get a better verdict the second time around.
What people must go through these days to earn the title of pirate...
In Sweden the cake is a pie.
They can't always appeal. The appeal process has to be requested and it's possible it's denied if the defendants can't create valid reasons for it. But since this was a large case and they could provide valid enough reasons for it, they were allowed to appeal.
They are in no way "innocent until proven guilty" now as the parent put it. They are guilty already, but they still have a possibility to turn that around.
But they were the ones who put the word pirate in the name of their site.
Originally PirateBay published economic trends. They used the price of Four'n'Twenties as a cost of living indicator.
Hence the name - "Pi Rate" which translates into English as "cost of a meat pie".
the city would be called Boozer City.
Which I think does exist somewhere in Australia
There is no city in this fine and fair land called "Boozer City". You fool! (perhaps you've just come back from BongBong - hopefully Mount Camel was not on the way)
All the towns are called "Boozer Town". The cities, going clockwise from the bottom-south, are Shooter City, Underbelly City, City of Colour and Movement, PartyCrash City, Big Stubby City, Bundaberg City, Ice City, and (my city) Tired And Emotional Politician City.
Don't listen to the talking Polar Bear on the bottle - he studied at the school of Tallho Rolling paper trivia.
Hmm, and I am currently downloading some TV episodes at the moment
Wrong again! You are watching the dishwasher (and that is a mouse in your hand).
More to the point, the "piracy" term refers to the commercial distribution of copyrighted works without the copyright owner's explicit authorization. If you download an album for your personal use or even if you upload it without getting any currency out of it you are not "pirating" anything. But the media companies sure want to tack that nasty term to everything they don't approve. After all, "unauthorized distribution for personal use" doesn't quite have that negative image associated with it. You need an image of some bearded, blood thirsty thief and murderer with a parrot on his shoulder to make believe that copying a file is somehow a terribly wrong thing to do.
Slashdot, fix your code or at least hire someone who is competent at it to do it for you.
Well, people don't want to pay. But they want to show their approval - even on Pirate Pay you see that plainly enough. Now they can do it in a way that is easy, will be taken sincerely (since it costs the approver some money), and will benefit the recipient financially as well as emotionally.
I think this a great idea. To be honest, I didn't think I would say that about any business model proposed by a Pirate Bay person... but I want to give this a chance.
xkcd is not in the sudoers file. This incident will be reported.
Also, You should consider who you trust more with your money/transactions. Paypal or Pirates? I know who I prefer
As soon as it's up and running, you can bet that there will be trojans, worms, evil javascript, and so forth all vying to exploit it. Setting up artificial flattr clicks to a scammer's site will probably be possible in many ways, even if you never consciously visit that site. Collecting flattr cash from a handful of victims is hardly worth the effort, but if you can infect enough unwitting donors, then it should be worth a bit.
Before long, infected PCs will just be sending floods of flattr clicks to a swarm of scammer sites, and the few clicks sent to intended sites will be effectively worthless. I expect flattr will fall by the wayside, unless security measures are added for each flattr click (password or other interactive authentication). It will certainly collapse after it adopts sufficient security to properly inhibit exploits.
Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. - Voltaire
Instead of constantly creating slices and diluting the amount equally between everyone, I want to be able to edit my Flatter profile the following way:
I log in and see all the sites I've Flattr'd in the last 30 days.
The site list is accompanied by sliders that are hooked into a bar graph or pie chart.
I slide the settings around until I'm satisfied with the split based on the content that I think has the most worth.
I can edit the sliders right up to payout day. That way if someone impresses me at the beginning of the month, but then pulls a bait-and-switch with trash for the following weeks (or it turned out they plagiarized another content producer) I can put that money elsewhere.
Why would heavy metal bands be making legal judgements?!?
In Sweden, your pie rates the content.
They can't always appeal. The appeal process has to be requested and it's possible it's denied if the defendants can't create valid reasons for it. (...) They are in no way "innocent until proven guilty" now as the parent put it. They are guilty already, but they still have a possibility to turn that around.
Formally, you are wrong. An appeal does not turn the burden of evidence around, they start again with a presumption of innocence and the prosecution has to prove their guilt. I don't have the exact details for Sweden but at least here in Norway you can appeal the lowest court's decision on findings of fact, findings or law or procedural errors. There Supreme court will often refuse an appeal, but the appeals court (hovrätten in Sweden, lagmannsretten in Norway) will rarely refuse an appeal.
The whole concept is a bit different in Scandinavia than in the US, remember here both sides can appeal, so both the prosecution and defendant has to accept the decision. If there's real material disputes or legal principles at stake, it's almost always appealed. A ruling here can equally well find you guilty even though you were found not guilty in the first trial, make your sentence longer and damages higher rather than acquit, shorten and lower it. It more a "full" trial versus a "light" trial than a US appeal.
Formally the legal system is one big process with up to three stages (courts) and your guilt is not decided and the sentence is not binding and final until all the possibilities for appeal have expired. That works both ways, an acquittal is also not binding and final so it can be appealed without causing double jeopardy, to be double jeopardy the system must have found you not guilty not just a single court. The Supreme court's decisions are immediately final since there is no more appeals, anything else is not.
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
If you're genuinely comparing someone who offered free movies and music via his website and was smacked down for it to NELSON FUCKING MANDELA and you're not high, you need to sort your fucking priorities out.
You do know Nelson Mandela blew up trains? He was a terrorist.
Personally, I'll stay with the copyright infringers.
How about clicking 2 times on the sites you like the most?
What?
There are so many irregularities in this case that it would make a very long list. Here are just a few off the top of my head:
After the (very surprising, if you know Swedish law) verdict, some journalists found out that the judge was biased. He had an extra job where he worked with one of the plaintiff lawyers. And he was member of a copyright-fundamentalist club promoting harsher copyright violation penalties where he regularly met several of the plaintiff lawyers. The judge kept this secret during the trial. A tribunal of three judges was set up to decide if the judge was really biased, but when their names were made public, it was revealed that all three were also biased. The tribunal was replaced with three more judges, and although it was revealed that at least one of the judges in the new panel had connections with one of the plaintiffs in the case, she was not replaced. The new tribunal decided that the judge was not biased.
Just five months before the big raid on The Pirate Bay the chief prosecutor in the case wrote a memo where he concluded that it would not be possible to convict the people behind TPB for copyright violation.
There are heavy rumors and a lot of incidental evidence that the raid against TPB and the resulting court case was done on a direct order by the government. This is illegal in Sweden because it means that the court system could be abused for political purposes. Documents that could tell if this is the case are kept secret by the Swedish government.
The policeman heading the police investigation got a new job immediately after the police investigation was concluded. His new employer was one of the plaintiffs in the case, and he negotiated his salary with his new employer in the final stages of the police investigation.
The legal advisor of The Pirate Bay was arrested during the raid and forced to give a DNA sample. (This is possible in Sweden if the charge can give at least one year of prison time and a DNA sample is relevant for the case.) One of the people later convicted to a year of jail time was also arrested and refused access to a lawyer during initial police questioning. (Possible in Sweden if the charge is is not likely to give jail time. And Swedish law admit evidence even if the police has obtained it illegally.)
Anybody who knows Swedish law and have followed this case closely (ie. read all court documents) know that this case is a joke and a distortion of Swedish law. This is a political court case intended to bend Swedish law so people can be convicted for "crimes" that are not illegal according the the letter of the law.
I think your response to me was very well thought out, and I'm sorry to see that you got modded "troll". With that said, I disagree with pretty much everything :)
Imagine somebody turned up at your front door and say .. And you say, wait, didn't I read about you being found guilty of something, and he says "yes but don't worry, I'm appealing!" - is that going to reassure you?
I'd take the trouble of finding out what he was convicted of. If he was an American citizen convicted of legally obtaining a handgun, I'd call the ruling preposterous and would disregard it. Likewise, a Swedish citizen found guilty of violating a law which does not exist is more likely to receive my business BECAUSE of his bullshit conviction.
The Pirate Bay deliberately antagonized the people he is now trying to help. He ignored DMCA takedowns and told anyone who would listen why he was right and the rest of the world was wrong.
Why is that a problem? He WAS right, and they were wrong.
If some twit from Saudi Arabia insisted that I take down a picture of Mohammed because it violates Sharia Law, I'd tell him to get fucked. The Pirates Bay folks did exactly the same thing.
And his business partners have a history of harassment, like the "ddo$" scheme against the opposition law firm.
Their "DDOS scheme" was perfectly legal, unlike the DDOS attack which "The Biz" was planning on using on them. Last I checked, there was no law prohibiting people from giving money to a law firm, while there certainly are laws which prohibit hiring hackers to flood someones servers.
Of course, they're walking a fine line there, and if I were them I certainly wouldn't have stooped to that. On the other hand, considering what they've had to put up with, I can certainly understand their response.
Like all the of the guys who ran the pirate bay, they have spent the last few years proving the world that they're stupid and untrustworthy.
That's your opinion. As far as I'm concerned, they've shown themselves to be a lot more reasonable and intelligent than anyone at the MPAA or RIA.