Slashdot Mirror
Pirate Apple TV Operation Nabbed In Australia
littlekorea writes "New South Wales Police have arrested a man selling USB keys bearing the Apple logo, which offered access to over a thousand Pay TV channels, another thousand movies on demand and several hundred adult films. A forensic analysis of the device revealed the content was hosted in China but streamed via US servers and domains."
It seems like the content industry has solved it... no need for SOPA/PIPA to be passed, just pay lawyers to sue and tell police to find pirates and the problem is solved.
How is content hosted in china but streamed via US servers? That statement doesn't make much sense.
Just because the guy choses a USB stick with an Apple logo on it (that's not even made by Apple) doesn't mean it has *anything* to do with Apple or Apple TV. Was he somehow spoofing iTunes accounts?
...of Michael Speck, Undercover International Entertainment Network Copyright Specialist, ...
Aw hell, it's late. Somebody take the ball and run with it.
Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
Not sure where you are from, but in the USA our courts treat digital content as property. Also, unauthorized access to password protected content falls under the same umbrella. I am unfamiliar with the laws covering digital content and password protected services in the UK, but I imagine the laws are either (1) more restrictive or (2) the courts have taken it upon themselves to issue warrants regardless of the laws on the books.
my mom posts on slashdot.
Best. Slashvertisement. Ever. Where can I get one of these?
That's right, so you better give the property back, or else. This isn't a controversy over whether it is "property". If I take a picture of a painting that is hanging in your house, I haven't stolen it.
Stolen implies that the original owner no longer owns it.
Once you thick-headed morons finally get this through your skull, we can begin having intelligent discussions about copyright infringement and what to do about it.
Its only several hundred adult films, not several thousand.
Australia is not in the UK. We have our own laws seperate from the empire.
Although according to this article they have identified 100 customers and will be pursuing them for recieving stolen goods. I dont know how that'll go in court though.
i spent five minutes thinking and all i got was this crappy sig
Australia is not in the UK.
I appologize. I blame my US education for my ignorance of geography.
my mom posts on slashdot.
Unless the USB keys themselves were stolen ... there is no transfer of property. We need to ... get the media to start correcting ridiculous statements.
The companies doing the reporting are also the companies who own the "content" that is being "stolen" (or "copied without purchase of the right to do so").
So I wouldn't bother spending any effort trying to get them to change their language to be more accurate (but less accusatory).
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
FTFA: “Customers of this criminal enterprise are not unintended beneficiaries of the digital revolution, they are receivers of stolen property,” he said.
Unless the USB keys themselves were stolen, to which there appears to be no mention of (and you can be sure they would mention it), there is no transfer of property.
We need to (I realize easier said than done) get the media to start correcting ridiculous statements.
Indeed, the "customers" were victims of fraud. The fraud being committed by the one who was arrested for selling fraudulent goods.
Also please note, the person who the article quoted was Michael Speck, A copyright "specialist" working for "international entertainment networks" not the NSW police.
As for receiving stolen goods, legally "The Crown must prove that, at the time of receipt of the goods, the accused knew or believed them to have been stolen." So if the Crown (what the state is called in court in Oz) cannot prove the purchaser knew the goods were stolen at the time of purchase, they cannot be charged with receiving stolen goods. Thus the customers are victims of fraud and this copyright "specialist" is full of shit.
Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
Come on Slashdot editors, you can do better than that. I suggest:
"Apple Pirate Apple TV Apple Operation Apple Nabbed Apple In Apple Australia Apple"
or maybe "Apple Apple Pirate Apple Apple Australia Apple Apple"
or possibly even "Apple iPhone iPad iPod iMac Macbook Pro Macbook Air iTunes Steve Jobs Apple"
Keep on spamming those keywords, you're improving the Internet for everyone!
The police in this case have stated that the customers of these USB keys (The list being compiled from information collected at the raid) will be persued by police and treated as “receivers of stolen property."
I really want to see how that bullshit plays out in court.
Probably exactly as the police expect. You may have notices that the Australian Courts are even more on the
side of big media than the US courts.
You dont live in Australia do you.
Australian courts tend to side against big media. Feel free to look up AFACT vs iinet.
Now the NSW Police haven't said they will do anything against the customers, the law views them as victims of fraud. In order for them to be receivers of stolen goods they must have had prior knowledge the goods were stolen.
Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
yeah, but the aircon is on the fritz again and we're freezing our tits off.
Christ - I've heard enough chimps in LARGE_US_BANK where I work throw the word "forensic" around to the point where it has become meaningless, and this just proves it. They probably just mounted the thumbdrive and read some files on it.
I want to delete my account but Slashdot doesn't allow it.
This is an excellent example of why piracy is alive and well today. I occasionally get a call from my cable (internet) provider asking me if I'm interested in taking advantage of a special 'deal' to get cable TV access for around $65/month (for a limited time, of course). Each time I respond by saying "so, you've removed all the advertisements, then?"
The person on the other end of the phone usually sounds confused until I explain that I will happily pay for content, but not so long as they try to treat me as the customer and the product at the same time. I _might_ pay $10/month for a full cable package with ads, and $50/month might be reasonable for 100% ad-free content, but anything like what the standard providers are charging for ad supported content is completely unthinkable. Until then, services like Hulu are a much better deal.
And if content providers are too stupid to put their content up on those sites, I have no qualms pirating it. If I can't find a way to watch content cheaply or for free, I don't bother with that content at all. Big content -- adapt or die!
Facts have a liberal bias.
Actually, the Queen of Australia is on our money. The fact that the same physical person also happens to be the Queen of England is irrelevant. One person, multiple hats.
When the Queen is in Australia, she's not there as the Queen of England (or any other Commonwealth realm). All the standards, flags, titles associated with her role as Queen of England are nowhere to be seen - the Australian equivalents are used instead. For instance this flag will be on her vehicle.
One might argue that it's all a subtle technicality. But we don't put the Queen of England on our money, any more than the UK puts the Queen of Australia on theirs.
Its only several hundred adult films, not several thousand.
That's what struck me about the story: A thousand channels and a thousand movies, but only several hundred adult films?
What kind of pervert is making these things???
Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
We should be so lucky.
Not only that, it's probably that "professional" stuff that is more comedy than anything erotic, if you really want free porn, there are a massive number of free youtube-like porn sites out there.
Monstar L
Who modded this informative? She is most definitely the Queen of Australia (and Head of State): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Queen_of_Australia (same argument applies to most of the other countries you mention too).
She's head of the Commonwealth too, as you point out. But that's a separate role to her role as Queen.
Actually, she is. Her Australian royal title is as follows:
"Elizabeth the Second, by the Grace of God Queen of Australia and Her other Realms and Territories, Head of the Commonwealth."
That she also has other royal titles in other realms of which she is a queen bears no relation to her status as a Queen of Australia.
"Elizabeth the Second, by the Grace of God Queen of Australia and Her other Realms and Territories, Head of the Commonwealth."
Shouldn't that be Elizabeth the First in Australia, given that it's the first Elizabeth to be queen of Australia?
Or was the original retroactively made queen of Australia?
There are precedents for the numbering differing between countries. King Karl XV of Sweden and Karl IV of Norway, for example, were the same person.
That's what worries me. When Britain becomes a republic, does that mean Her Royal Highness will move here to Australia for good? ;)
11% of Americans could not find America
*removes sunglasses* Mother of god...
It would be futile for Australians to hang on to British laws, given that most of them were sent there because they didn't obey them.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
I'm amazed the whole thing was instigated by a Chinese company investigating piracy of their service/product. I thought they were the all time king's of ignoring other people's IP?
I want a list of atrocities done in your name - Recoil