Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

NinjaVideo.net Founder Gets 14 Months

Posted by samzenpus on from the do-not-pass-go dept.

angry tapir writes "A Virginia judge has sentenced Matthew David Howard Smith, a founder of the NinjaVideo.net website, to 14 months in prison, the U.S. Department of Justice announced Friday. Smith was indicted along with four others late last year. The DOJ charged that they illegally provided copyright-protected movies and TV programs for download from the NinjaVideo.net website. The site operated from February 2008 until authorities shut it down in June 2010."

5 of 239 comments (clear)

  1. My tax money supporting the film industry by BlueCoder · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I am upset that my taxes go to supporting the film industry's copyright policing like this.

    Keeping a person in jail for a year costs between 25-50K not including court costs.

    That's money that can be used for more worthwhile things. What it's being spent on will not result in any changed behavior or profits for the entertainment industry. It only drives things more underground and makes people become more sophisticated. The only people making money from this are the lawyers collecting paychecks and not producing anything of worth for society.

    It's also exposes all the corrupt politicians and the justice system. While they have always been corrupt I would have been happier to live in ignorance than to have it exposed out in the open like this.

    Copyright police? Censorship? The original politicians that started this country are turning over in their graves. This country was started as a backlash to self serving corruption like this.

    1. Re:My tax money supporting the film industry by bky1701 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The founders were not saints. Most were tax evaders or smugglers angry about the British crackdowns on their activities. Almost all owned slaves. Many were womanizers. Once in office, they pretty much all abused power; the Alien and Sedition Acts were possibly worse than their modern counterparts, especially compared to what was actually possible in the day. My point is, they might have been perfectly fine with a lot of what is going on today. Indeed, they'd likely be more concerned about the Federal Reserve than with the rampant corruption and rights violations.

      --
      Great Intellect...
  2. Re:Meanwhile... by the+eric+conspiracy · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Incorrect.

    From Politifact

    "The highest-profile convictions we found were from Taylor, Bean & Whitaker, which was a mortgage lending firm based not on Wall Street, but in Ocala, Fla. Its former chairman, Lee B. Farkas, was convicted of directing nearly $3 billion in fraud that put thousands out of work and contributed to the collapse of Colonial Bank. The collapse was the sixth-largest bank collapse in U.S. history. A judge sentenced Farkas to 30 years in prison on June 30, 2011. Several other executives associated with the firm pleaded guilty in related cases. "

  3. "Authorities"? by jginspace · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The site operated from February 2008 until authorities shut it down in June 2010.

    Ninjavideo.net was among the first group of sites seized by ICE and their "authority" is questionable.

    Interestingly, ICE have not placed a redirect to their Youtube video yet on any of the Ninja* sites (see TVshack.cc for an example) so presumably the decision to steal/confiscate the site is still being contested by Matthew David Howard Smith or an associate.

  4. Re:meanwhile: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Here's a graph that explains it for you.

    At left, we see that as people at the bottom of the income spectrum care more about an issue, the probability of action on that issue scarcely budges. At right we see that policy responds a little more to median preferences. But what's clear in both is that the rich are much more successful at getting their issues on the docket.

    So no, money alone does buy you your interests. There will obviously be counter-examples. But the policy decisions will largely prevail in your favour unless there is a large countervailing public opinion (as there was with all the examples you've provided). Basically, unless a large portion of the public decides it's an issue, the decision will go in favour of the wealthy.

    Money in politics is the single biggest corrupting factor in politics. Remove direct money & indirect money & benefits will be the next biggest factor. & it'll keep going that way, but each time the totals will (in theory) keep decreasing so you're making a net positive change.