Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

10 Years in Prison For Online Pirates a Step Closer in the UK (torrentfreak.com)

Posted by msmash on from the big-jail-time dept.

The UK Government's Digital Economy Bill has moved a step closer to becoming law after its second reading in Parliament. With unanimous support, the current two-year maximum custodial sentence for online piracy is almost certain to increase to a decade, TorrentFreak reports. From the article: Due to UK copyright law allowing for custodial sentences of 'just' two years for online offenses, anti-piracy groups such as the Federation Against Copyright Theft have chosen to pursue their own private prosecutions. These have largely taken place under legislation designed for those who have committed fraud, rather than the more appropriate offense of copyright infringement. Physical pirates (CDs, DVDs) can be jailed for up to 10 years under current legislation. During the past few years, there have been lobbying efforts for this punishment to apply both on and offline. That resulted in a UK Government announcement last year indicating that it would move to increase the maximum prison sentence for online copyright infringement to ten years. They also urge Google to do something about growing incidents of piracy.

85 of 136 comments (clear)

  1. Crazy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    10 years for piracy? Force them to pay for the pirated content, plus a fine. Why prison at all?

    Also, what about google? Why should google "do something"? Not their table . . .

    1. Re:Crazy by Z00L00K · · Score: 3, Funny

      The UK starts to look like the world of Max Headroom.

      --
      If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
    2. Re:Crazy by Z00L00K · · Score: 1

      B.t.w related stories are listed as:

      • World Reacts To The Worst Mass Shooting In U.S. History
      • The Case Against a Universal Basic Income
      • Mass Shooting In San Bernardino Kills At Least 14
      • PayPal Pulls North Carolina Plan After Transgender Bathroom Law
      • Terrorist Attack In Brussels Airport and Metro Station: At Least 34 Dead

      Seems right... Except the PayPal story that's WTF related.

      --
      If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
    3. Re:Crazy by MitchDev · · Score: 2

      Because copying stuff on the internet is WORSE than stealing physical items!

      Put everyone in fear of jail and it makes the police state easier to maintain...

    4. Re: Crazy by brantondaveperson · · Score: 2

      Torrents upload. People have been punished for that, I believe.

    5. Re: Crazy by Pax681 · · Score: 1

      Torrents upload. People have been punished for that, I believe.

      and as long as you are using a torrent that let's you Freeleach then it's all fine NOT to upload.. you can limit the bandwidth you upload tight down to 0 on a decent client. Your argument only works when you are getting torrents from sites that worry about tracker ratios and by far not all do.

    6. Re: Crazy by brantondaveperson · · Score: 1

      Well, sure, but if everyone did this the whole torrent system would completely collapse. So, if they make uploading illegal, and actually manage to really catch people doing it on a large scale, then there won't be any torrents left.

    7. Re: Crazy by Pax681 · · Score: 2

      Well, sure, but if everyone did this the whole torrent system would completely collapse. So, if they make uploading illegal, and actually manage to really catch people doing it on a large scale, then there won't be any torrents left.

      The legal situation in Scotland where i am and also in England coincide here(We have separate and distinct legal systems). It IS already illegal to upload as it's the sharing part that's getting you into trouble for distribution.. the distribution part being key to their case as X IP numbers connected = amount of shares = money lost according to the studio and their agencies.
      BUT downloading it.. perfectly fine and not illegal. this is also why many streaming sites like Http://movies.ru and it's other addresses are so popular here too. for the end user they are a win win as the distribution is being done before it touches them and they aren't sharing it so it's legal and the onus for the law breaking falls to the website... simple bud

    8. Re: Crazy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Do you think they bother to look at the difference?
      The average seed ratio is 1.0, a few people seed up to 10
      Yet the record studios always claim the defendant distributed tens of thousands copies.
      Proof isn't exactly something that is important in theses cases.
      It's more about who wears a suit and who shows up in slacks.

    9. Re:Crazy by Frank+Burly · · Score: 1

      In order to function as a deterrent the penalty against something must make the crime unappealing. If you pirate a $10 movie and the maximum penalty is $20 then it is economically rational to pirate a movie if you have only a 50% chance of being caught. The chance of being prosecuted for torrenting is, I bet, about 0.0000001. So to deter people, the penalty has to be much more severe to make the crime economically irrational. And economic self interest is the the baseline for an effective penalty, not the ceiling.

    10. Re:Crazy by Anonymous+Brave+Guy · · Score: 1

      Leaving aside that this is obviously a troll, you should know that the current EU administration is heavily on the strong-copyright and big-media side of this debate. For example, EU rules are why the UK government recently failed to change the law to allow a reasonable personal use exception to copyright that was long overdue.

      Also, the 10 year penalty we're discussing here is aimed at large-scale, professional distributors. It's not for someone who accidentally downloaded someone's mix that had a bit of Taylor Swift playing in the background for five seconds. It's not even for someone who gave their friend a copy of Taylor Swift's new album at school.

      --
      If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
    11. Re: Crazy by mark-t · · Score: 1

      So, if .... then there won't be any torrents left

      Except for ones that have content that was legal for anyone to copy and distribute in the first place without express permission from the copyright holder.

      Much of the freely available content or software that I download these days is via torrent.

      --
      File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
    12. Re: Crazy by JesseMcDonald · · Score: 1

      as X IP numbers connected = amount of shares

      Which is really stupid, when you think about it. If you upload 0.1% of a file to 1,000 different peers, that's one copy shared, not 1,000. And if they all do the same (within the group) that's 1,000 copies created, not 1,000,000. But the studios manage to get away with suing 1,000 peers for 1,000 copies each, which is far more than the potential revenues even if one very generously assumes that every peer who obtains a copy of the file represents a lost sale, even before you throw in nonsense like statutory damages.

      The correct liability for a single peer with a share ratio of 1.00 or less (cumulative upload less than or equal to the file size) is no more than perhaps three times the standard retail value of the work. Not $450 or $1,500 or $150,000 or $21M, no matter how many other peers were involved.

      --
      "The state is that great fiction by which everyone tries to live at the expense of everyone else." - Bastiat
    13. Re:Crazy by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      That's what it's about: fear.

      The City of London Police, the content industry's private police force, will use this to threaten and intimidate people running services that compete with their corporate masters.

      With this and Brexit, it's probably just best to take your innovation elsewhere.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    14. Re:Crazy by TheRaven64 · · Score: 2

      No, he's right, as long as he's talking about the people in power and not the voters. Most of the things that the Brexit crowd was complaining about were either things that were done by Westminster, or things that the EU had tried to change but been vetoed by the British government's representatives on the Council and the Commission. The people pushing for Brexit, for example, were the same ones who tried to push TTIP though and found a lot of opposition in the EU. They'll be ecstatic to be able to have an equally bad trade deal between the UK and USA and be able to keep moving capital abroad.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    15. Re: Crazy by Pax681 · · Score: 1

      as X IP numbers connected = amount of shares

      Which is really stupid, when you think about it. If you upload 0.1% of a file to 1,000 different peers, that's one copy shared, not 1,000. And if they all do the same (within the group) that's 1,000 copies created, not 1,000,000. But the studios manage to get away with suing 1,000 peers for 1,000 copies each, which is far more than the potential revenues even if one very generously assumes that every peer who obtains a copy of the file represents a lost sale, even before you throw in nonsense like statutory damages.

      The correct liability for a single peer with a share ratio of 1.00 or less (cumulative upload less than or equal to the file size) is no more than perhaps three times the standard retail value of the work. Not $450 or $1,500 or $150,000 or $21M, no matter how many other peers were involved.

      and you are absolutely correct,spot on , accurate and reasonable in what you say.... now tell me.. when did that get in the way of the copyright industry's legal stance? they are of course gonna try and hump you for every cent they have... this is a new side industry for them that rakes in millions.

    16. Re: Crazy by wickedwitchofwest · · Score: 1

      This legislation was being considered before Brexit.

    17. Re:Crazy by jabuzz · · Score: 1

      The government failed because to introduce personal use exception because it did not follow the rules and was using a statutory instrument rather than primary legislation. I would note that the government lost in a UK court and not the ECJ. The basic rule that they lost against while an EU rule is that you cannot take away someones property (and the UK court decided that IP is property) without either giving compensation or having proper evidence that there would be no financial loss. They did neither of the above so it was ruled illegal because it was a statutory instrument and not a piece of primary legislation.

      There are a range of options open to the government to introduce a personal use exception that would be beyond legal challenge. It's not clear which route they will take, though with Brexit it may well now be on the back burner for the next decade as parliament is going to be very very busy dealing with the legislative fallout from that, so the simplest way to fix the problem pass a bill through parliament is probably out the window.

      The next best one is to have evidence to show that a personal use exception would not cause any financial loss to the IP holders. This is the very very narrow point on which the government lost the case. In fact it was even narrower than that, as it was argued that the fair use/personal exception might encourage wider infringement leading to a financial loss to the IP holders and the government didn't have any evidence that this would not be the case.

      I actually don't think it is hard to come up with that evidence and I also think that the lack of fair use exception makes it more likely I will infringe IP. Simply put in the UK it is just as illegal for me to rip a CD I own into MP3 format as it is to download it from some torrent site on the internet.

      However you are totally correct about the 10 year penalty, you have to be doing the copyright infringement for commercial gain to be liable for that penalty. Better still if you make a copy of Taylor Swift's new album maximum damages are *ACTUAL* losses, which is less than £10, and hence never ever going to be prosecuted in a court.

  2. It's the new war on drugs! by MikeDataLink · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Let's put lots of young people in prison on long mandatory sentences for petty crimes. Sounds genius!

    --
    Mike @ The Geek Pub. Let's Make Stuff!
    1. Re:It's the new war on drugs! by Tablizer · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Let's put lots of young people in prison on long mandatory sentences for petty crimes. Sounds genius!

      Plutocracy at work:

            Rape, stab, murder = yawn

            Copy My-Little-Pony vid = SLAMMER FOREVER!

      You can stab people, just not profits.

      --
      Table-ized A.I.
    2. Re:It's the new war on drugs! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Marijuana is gradually being legalized in western countries, we need *something* to keep the jail cells full.

    3. Re:It's the new war on drugs! by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      It would be interesting to see what would happen to the entertainment industry if copyright enforcement and/or laws were very weak.

      Would it depress the economy overall, or just shift where entertainment money is spent?

      For example, it's possible that big-budget movies would mostly disappear, but more yet smaller-budget movies would appear with embedded product placements. China seems to have been shifting to the second model rather than fight piracy harder. And their movie industry is doing fine.

      --
      Table-ized A.I.
    4. Re:It's the new war on drugs! by ItsJustAPseudonym · · Score: 2

      Max Headroom

      "Credit fraud? That's worse than murder!"

    5. Re: It's the new war on drugs! by AgNO3 · · Score: 1

      What crack world are you in. China's big budget movie industry is growing like weeds and wild fire had babies.

      --
      OMG Ponies!!! with Glitter!!!! I miss Pink :-(
    6. Re:It's the new war on drugs! by Solandri · · Score: 1

      You Brits should challenge this as cruel and unusual punishment. It's prohibited in UK common law by the1689 Bill of Rightw. As you and others have pointed out, it's ridiculous for this sort of petty financial crime to have punishments worse than violent crimes. Especially when financial crimes six orders of magnitude larger frequently have zero jail time.

    7. Re: It's the new war on drugs! by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      Because many people still like to get out and go to theaters. But pirating is rampant there in terms of the after-market.

      --
      Table-ized A.I.
    8. Re:It's the new war on drugs! by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      Behold! A new Rule of Acquisition!

      --
      Table-ized A.I.
    9. Re:It's the new war on drugs! by Xest · · Score: 1

      This is only for criminal piracy - i.e. piracy to make a profit, and the maximum sentence is only for the most serious cases, so for example if someone is selling pirated software online as legitimate software and then using that money to fund al-Qaeda or whatever then they might get 10 years.

      People downloading the latest movies, TV series, or music aren't affected by this as they're not engaging in criminal piracy, it's still a civil issue and there is no prison sentence for civil offences.

  3. That EU Flag by gigne · · Score: 1

    Will be missed

    --
    Signature v3.0, now with 42% less memory usage.
  4. 10 years?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    “However, I wish to stress to hon. Members and to members of the public that this is not to catch out people who download music and unwittingly download or stream something illegal. I want to make that clear in adding my support to this measure. As far as I understand it, it targets the criminals who make money from distributing music to which they do not have the rights.”

    We'll see about that. If it's anything like in the states, one offense and you'll be charged with piracy. Like when you're caught with a - ONE - joint, you are charged with intent to distribute.

    The law will be abused.

    1. Re:10 years?! by MitchDev · · Score: 2

      That's EXACTLY what this is, the government's "gateway drug" to totalitarianism....

    2. Re:10 years?! by gfxguy · · Score: 1

      That's what we've learned, isn't it? Or are people's memories show short they don't remember. There are any number of poorly or vaguely written laws that lawmakers said would only be used for something in particular, but have been applied in any way possible since.

      --
      Stupid sexy Flanders.
    3. Re:10 years?! by bobbied · · Score: 1

      The law will be abused.

      Ya think?

      Those who don't know history are doomed to repeat it... While those of us who do are doomed to helplessly watch.

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    4. Re:10 years?! by NotInHere · · Score: 1

      Or are people's memories show short they don't remember.

      No, its just that people tend to get old and die at some point, where only the young stay, who think that history is boring and it was a different time and can't happen ever ever again.

  5. Prison conversations become more ridiculous by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    PrisonerA: "What are you in for?"
    PrisonerB: "I was caught with a potted plant in my home."
    PrisonerC: "I couldn't remember my password."

    and now,

    PrisonerD: "I consumed propaganda without also paying for the privilege."

    And many more! Western civilization has gone bonkers.

    1. Re:Prison conversations become more ridiculous by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

      PrisonerE I shoplifted the same CD and I have 3 days left on my 30 day visit don't drop the soap.

    2. Re:Prison conversations become more ridiculous by Z00L00K · · Score: 1

      Prisoner A: I got 10 years for assault and manslaughter, you?
      Prisoner B: I shared a movie.

      I guess that Prisoner B will have a huge butthole or change to violent crimes instead when he comes out.

      --
      If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
    3. Re:Prison conversations become more ridiculous by bobbied · · Score: 1

      Prisoner A: I got 10 years for assault and manslaughter, you? Prisoner B: I shared a movie.

      I guess that Prisoner B will have a huge butthole or change to violent crimes instead when he comes out.

      Just shoplift the Blu-Ray, less punishment for that.

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    4. Re:Prison conversations become more ridiculous by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      Three prisoners in a UK prison get to talking about why they are there.
      "I am here because I trusted onion routing, and they charged me with piracy," says the first.
      "I am here because my VPN leaked my real IP, and they charged me with piracy," says the second.
      "I am here because my VPN worked well every day," says the third, "and they charged me with been a Russian spy."

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    5. Re:Prison conversations become more ridiculous by Gonoff · · Score: 1

      Just shoplift the Blu-Ray, less punishment for that.

      Isn't having a Blu-Ray enough punishment for anyone?

      --
      I'll see your Constitution and raise you a Queen.
  6. Up the ante! by Opportunist · · Score: 3, Insightful

    10 years? For 10 years I can mow down an MP with my car. Or kidnap his kids and rape them repeatedly before cutting off a limb or two. Or after, if that's more my fancy. I could also blow up the effin' Parliament (of course while nobody is inside, else it could mean a longer sentence).

    No, wait, blowing up the Parliament carries a lower sentence.

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    1. Re:Up the ante! by WormholeFiend · · Score: 1

      "No, wait, blowing up the Parliament carries a lower sentence."

      What if you do it on the 5th of November?

    2. Re:Up the ante! by Z00L00K · · Score: 1

      Just avoid blowing up a member of the royal family or you will see that they find a way to reinstate the death penalty.

      --
      If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
    3. Re:Up the ante! by Roger+W+Moore · · Score: 1

      No, wait, blowing up the Parliament carries a lower sentence.

      Not to mention that you'll get an annual holiday named after you - and that's even if the plan doesn't work!

    4. Re:Up the ante! by ncc74656 · · Score: 1

      No, wait, blowing up the Parliament carries a lower sentence.

      Umm...didn't the last guy who tried to blow up Parliament meet a rather more harsh fate?

      --
      20 January 2017: the End of an Error.
    5. Re:Up the ante! by sinij · · Score: 1

      "No, wait, blowing up the Parliament carries a lower sentence."

      What if you do it on the 5th of November?

      With laws like this, do they have any other options left?

    6. Re:Up the ante! by NotInHere · · Score: 1

      Not as long as that member of the royal family brings disgrace to it. Then you even may get paid afterwards.

    7. Re:Up the ante! by Z00L00K · · Score: 1

      Probably paid by being requested to serve as a serf at a remote embassy. That would please everyone.

      --
      If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
    8. Re:Up the ante! by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Recover from the after-election hangover, most likely.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    9. Re:Up the ante! by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      That would probably depend on who is in power at the time...

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    10. Re:Up the ante! by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      That's why I said to empty it out first.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  7. Unintended concequences by codepigeon · · Score: 1

    I am a tech professional and major nerd. When I was growing up and teaching myself different software and operating system, I had the tendency to find them on "sharing" websites. (only because I was dirt poor and only looking to learn the tools)

    Could this kind of severe punishment have an unintended consequence of causing a potential younger tech professional from wanting to move to the UK? I know a lot of tech people who "share" movies and such (I have since grown out of it, but I don't begrudge someone who does). I think it is kind of part of the millennial culture. I could be wrong.

    1. Re:Unintended concequences by mattmarlowe · · Score: 2

      Not to be pedantic but I hate that the creation of Linux is being used above to promote piracy.

      Yes, part of the motivation for the creation of Linux was to save $ on software - but it was more than that.

      - The UNIX most people used (SunOS) was only available on Sun Workstations which were wickedly expensive dedicated hardware found only at universities or corporations that could afford them.
      - The BSD community at the time had some ports to the x86 platform but their developers didn't really get along with many in the open-source community.
      - Tanenbaum had proven that x86 hardware (still new to critical tasks) could run UNIX, but his operating system was more of a teaching tool than software that was designed to run GNU/Open Source Software or even be used in production systems.

      So, Linux succeeded and was created not just because it was cheaper, but because it really filled a need that other solutions hadn't met yet.

    2. Re:Unintended concequences by Scarletdown · · Score: 1

      I am a tech professional and major nerd. When I was growing up and teaching myself different software and operating system, I had the tendency to find them on "sharing" websites. (only because I was dirt poor and only looking to learn the tools)

      Could this kind of severe punishment have an unintended consequence of causing a potential younger tech professional from wanting to move to the UK? I know a lot of tech people who "share" movies and such (I have since grown out of it, but I don't begrudge someone who does). I think it is kind of part of the millennial culture. I could be wrong.

      Meh. I would imagine that the fact that the UK is rapidly becoming a real world model of Airstrip One would be more than enough to discourage anyone at all; not just IT people, from wanting to move there.

      --
      This space unintentionally left blank.
  8. Online Pirates and the WWW by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    It's too bad we didn't call it the "all-around really radical reticulation" so our third-level domains would traditionally start with arrr.

  9. This would result in Mass Incarceration by Zombie+Ryushu · · Score: 1

    This would result in Mass Incarceration of young people. Copyright infringement is basically a thought crime. I wish that we could see more picketing and mass protests of this sort of thing all over the world. Because "Intellectual Property" is effectively worthless. Unlike Physical goods, its not finite, and can be reproduced limitlessly. To keep a few very rich and powerful people in power, we are willing to institute a massive wave of fascism, which will end in destroying free speech and communication in the western civilized world.

  10. What about the burden of proof? ISP's do a poor jo by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

    What about the burden of proof? ISP's do a poor job of keep track of equipment so they end up with the wrong person just from that.

    What about the proving that file is pirated and not an Professor's Lecture's that has the same name as an artist?

  11. Used to be a Mandatory Death Sentence by Roger+W+Moore · · Score: 4, Funny

    10 years for piracy?

    Actually until 1998 piracy used to carry a mandatory death sentence in the UK under the 1837 piracy act. This was one of the few crimes which still had it after the (almost) abolition of the death sentence in 1965. Mind you it did have to be committed on the high seas so it only applied to those downloading content while on a ship at sea.

    1. Re:Used to be a Mandatory Death Sentence by MitchDev · · Score: 1

      You are confusing actual piracy with what this actually refers to, copyright violations.

    2. Re:Used to be a Mandatory Death Sentence by clodney · · Score: 1

      Whoosh

    3. Re:Used to be a Mandatory Death Sentence by jellomizer · · Score: 1

      What will stop the courts from making the same mistake?

      The way most laws work, they are not enforced, unless they want to convict someone for a crime. So person X was accused for Crime Y where they couldn't find the evidence for that, but they did find some small scale pirating or copyright infringement, and boom 10 year sentence, and the lawers on his side may not been fully prepared to fight a piracy charge.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    4. Re:Used to be a Mandatory Death Sentence by MitchDev · · Score: 1

      And you don't see a problem with that?

    5. Re:Used to be a Mandatory Death Sentence by stealth_finger · · Score: 1

      Ya Ha matey, we's be here for your rips. Puts all the usb in this bag and we'll be lettin ya live.

      --
      Wanna buy a shirt?
      https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
  12. Re:Good by michelcolman · · Score: 1

    Nah, the majority will just go "they came for the nerds, but I was not a nerd, so..."

  13. licensing adjustment visits where they say you nee by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

    licensing adjustment visits where they say you need to license each system in your office even if they don't use that software at all.

    Or on your VM you need to pay for all the cores in the host even if Oracle is just using 1/4 of them.

  14. in the mean time... by Lead+Butthead · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Nazi war criminals serves five years or less.
    Apparently IP piracy is more severe in scope than industrialized murder of six million.

    --
    ELOI, ELOI, LAMA SABACHTHANI!?
    1. Re:in the mean time... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      Rape gets you a slap on the wrist because the people and the wallets in whose name filesharers are being imprisoned, tend to like to rape a lot and need the law to have a contingency for them. There's also a lot of kiddie rape among them entertainment industry stars, and from all the years of news articles and controversy with a kiddie rape tradition within Hollywood and labels and those entertainment companies it is only telling why kiddie rape nets so little time in the joint.

      On another hand, let us look at the nature of the copyright cartel a little:

      a. Drug trafficking (Vytas Simanavicius case[http://torrentfreak.com/anti-piracy-chief-pleads-guilty-to-drug-trafficking-130421/])
      b. Defamation (Prenda/Malibu)
      [http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2014/01/porn-troll-prenda-law-sanctioned-in-defamation-lawsuit/]
      [http://torrentfreak.com/accused-movie-pirate-sues-for-defamation-120723/]
      c. Uploading torrents and copyright material themselves unlawfully (Megaupload case, file-lockers, and honeypot schemes).
      http://www.brutalattack.org/index.php/2013/08/15/copyright-troll-ran-pirate-bay-honeypot-comcast-confirms/
      [https://torrentfreak.com/voltage-pictures-sued-for-copyright-infringement-150520/]
      This leads to hypocrisy.
      d. Breaking the 8th Amendment of the USA under the justification of example making. (Fining people hundreds of thousands per song or movie, instead of fair fines of the exact price of the pirated products + a reasonable percentage addition based on the product cost which doesn't go beyond 100%; Aaron Swartz case)
      [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aaron_Swartz]
      e. Actual cybercrime of spreading malware and trojans on the Internet (https://torrentfreak.com/30000-pirates-receive-fake-fines-with-trojans-attached-140708)
      f. Unwarranted and unlawful incarceration beyond what the law regards as a legal period (Piratebay founder Gottfrid Svartholm), or in other words subversion and undermining of the justice system and causing the loss of trust in the system and the twisting of the term "justice" itself into a worthless term.
      g. Bribery, blackmail and perversion of the justice system (Piratebay founder, KimDotCom, Prenda,
      [http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/12/19/google-internet-censorship_n_6354518.html]
      h. Wasting more tax-payer money than artists lose to piracy over unlawful use of police forces (KimDotCom case,
      [http://torrentfreak.com/can-pirate-bay-make-comeback-141210/] and many more) when the police could be saving actual lives...
      So anti-pirates are also potentially indirectly responsible for civilian deaths due to siphoning police reserves.
      i. Filing millions of false DMCA notices and taking down many legitimate sites while hurting many businesses in the process. Censorship.
      [https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20071010/162619.shtml]
      j. Creating money out of thin air by making up piracy/download numbers, exaggerating them vastly, and thus undermining the economic system. Using this fraudulent way of getting money and passing it off as legal also constitutes money laundering. There's also the issue of false advertisement in the digital economy not being punished [see gaming, EA and Ubisoft just for some examples]. False advertising being helped by the nature of digital products not being capable of being ostensibly evaluated by an individual like material tangible products, and the attempt at monopolizing this "blindness" by scamming with rigged demos, paying up reviews and attacking negative reviews [see 4. bellow], paying up let's play videos and using the DMCA to take down any negative critique that may appear, and generally trying to monopolize the ability of people to know what they may pay for and scam on a massive scale, and removing the ability of consumers to have a return guarantee on products in any way possible. All summed up, piracy is the only tool currently in existence that gives power to consumers over the corporations trying to scam them in full scale, and trying to destroy the "consumer is always right" principle that existe

  15. "What are you in for?" by npslider · · Score: 4, Funny

    Prisoner 1: "What are you in for?"
    Prisoner 2: "I posted a low grade copy of "Spock's Brain" to YouTube."
    Prisoner 1: "What!? Are you mad? How many views did you get?"
    Prisoner 2: "Zero."
    Prisoner 1: "How long is your sentence?"
    Prisoner 2: "They are giving me 'The Chair' tomorrow morning."
    Prisoner 1: "Dude, I'm sorry. That sucks."
    Prisoner 2: "Yeah... well, my brother-in law did the same thing; only it was "Threshold".
    Prisoner 1: "Star Trek Voyager? The Wacko Amphibians??"
    Prisoner 2: "Yeah. That one. He died in a drone strike, an hour after it was posted."
    Prisoner 1: "Who killed him?"
    Prisoner 2: "It's a toss up between Trekkie's and the government. I'm leaning towards the government."
    Prisoner 1: "Well... I'm out tomorrow. I guess killing 12 people isn't what it used to be. Your president really means business in clearing this Cuban prison."

    The sign above the door reads 'Guantanamo Bay'

  16. 6 months for rape or a decade for copying a file? by MooseTick · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I know its US vs UK, but Brock Turner (http://www.cnn.com/2016/06/06/us/sexual-assault-brock-turner-stanford/) received a 6 month sentence for raping an unconscious woman, yet someone else could spend 20 times that length of time imprisoned for copying a file?

    And people wonder why we question our faith in the police, government and the system!

    --
    Ninjas don't carry tic tacs
  17. Proportionality by GeekWithAKnife · · Score: 4, Informative


    When will these type of crimes become proportional FFS??

    Here's some average jail times for crimes in the UK to put this into perspective:

    Administering drugs to obtain intercourse Sexual Offences Act 1956 s4 2 years

    Abuse of trust: sexual activity with a child Sexual Offences Act 2003 s16 5 years

    Burglary with intent to commit rape (non-dwelling) Theft Act 1968 s9 10 years

    Distributing copyrighted material Dumbass Act 2016 10 years?!

    Who is "demanding justice" in this case to require 10 years for "piracy"? It's not for the people...you know, the individuals that make this democracy thing work.

    --
    A 'singular oddity' is an event that cannot be explained and only happens when you are alone.
  18. 8th ammendment by neghvar1 · · Score: 3, Funny

    Thankfully the USA has the 8th amendment forbidding cruel or unusual punishment. So we won't see such a bill here.

    1. Re:8th ammendment by sinij · · Score: 1

      Yes, but US allowed crazy damages in similar cases. So while no jail time, bankruptcy is still on the table.

    2. Re:8th ammendment by bobbied · · Score: 1

      Bankruptcy only lasts 7 years on your credit record doesn't it? And although it ruins your credit for awhile, you can still live as you please (and can afford to pay cash for).

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
  19. Rape a Woman.... less than a year by PortHaven · · Score: 1

    View a video or song, and 10 years.

    Oh, mind you, most of us have bought the same album in different formats repeatedly. So if you bought that album on vinyl, cassette, and CD. You didn't buy it, per the record labels you just bought a license.

    Well, fine....where the hell is my damn license? And if I have a license, why does the media matter?

    1. Re:Rape a Woman.... less than a year by bobbied · · Score: 1

      Good point... But your license says you cannot copy the work onto a different media, and make only a single backup copy.

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
  20. Looks reasonable by sinij · · Score: 1

    UK is a maritime nation, we can't allow bandits interrupt maritime shipping routes and commerce. Piracy on the high seas should be punished with a stiff jail time. They used to hang for that, so 10 years is rather civilized.

  21. Re:6 months for rape or a decade for copying a fil by ItsJustAPseudonym · · Score: 1

    ...and he only had to stay in prison for three of the six months. He's out, now.

  22. Actual pirates aren't Even Detained by Roger+W+Moore · · Score: 1

    You are confusing actual piracy with what this actually refers to, copyright violations.

    No I would never do that because you aren't even detained, let alone imprisoned for 10 years, for actual piracy under UK law because they are worried you might try to claim asylum.

  23. So basically... by John+Allsup · · Score: 1

    Torrenting a few porn movies is worse than rape. At some point ideas like 'fair', and 'proportional' were euphemised and defined out of the window.

    --
    John_Chalisque
  24. What better way to kill the industry? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Those convicted aren't going to be purchasing media for the next 10 years, nor likely thereafter out of spite.

    Even if it does function as a deterrent, many are going react with a similar "fuck you" to the establishment and find other entertainment. (Not only pirates, but principled people protesting this outrageous injustice.) Media outlets will become a target of vandalism/arson/etc., which will also provide entertainment with a lesser sentence if caught.

    The only paying customers left will be worthy of scorn, and may themselves become targets for retribution in various ways. (Likewise with a lesser sentence if caught.) Will there be enough shameless and foolish people left to support the industry?

  25. Re:How Not to Go to Prision for 10 Years for Pirac by BlueStrat · · Score: 1

    Don't be and Online Pirate.

    Or simply kill the movie studio and MPAA/RIAA heads.

    You'd likely get less than 10 years for that at least in time served, so why not? Same with Lords & MPs who are in favor of this expanded sentencing for copyright violations.

    Off with their heads (which seems rather a popular pastime in the UK since the influx of young men from the ME ramped up)!

    Strat

    --
    Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
  26. This is ludicrous by Trogre · · Score: 2

    Abolish copyright. Now.

    --
    "Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
    1. Re:This is ludicrous by twokay · · Score: 1

      Every year they add to the offence is a movie i will not got to the cinema and pay for. I barely make it past 10 visits a year currently, so they are getting very little of my money. Despite all the censorship in the UK of torrent sites it is still ridiculously easy to find any movie i want (there are even sites that have a handy list all in one place, including all the ones i didn't know about). And everyone i know of a similar age is aware of how to "pirate" and does so. Are they really going to lock up everyone in the UK under 40?

      --
      Wannabe nerd.
  27. "pirates"? by tomxor · · Score: 1

    Such a vauge term, if they mean copyright inf ringers then they are going to have to increase the size of their prisons massively to accommodate a 3rd of the counties population. I should probably give up copyright infringement and become a murderer as a past time so i'm less likely to go to jail for a decade.

  28. This is great by mumma3k · · Score: 1

    Great. Just plant som fresh piracy materal at known serial rapists and phedophiles, and they will get proper sentences.