de prosecution has tried to use the central organisation for summoning in Sweden but this didn't work. After this they tried a swedish bailiff which also failed.
Not surprising since Swedish bureaucracy effectively halts in July due to vacations.
It would appear that the summons were done in June, though - if they sent the emails around when the other channels were tried:
The prosecution sent mails to the email adresses of the prosecuted and the official owner of thepiratebay.org on 19 and 23 juni 2009
It is also possible that the emails were sent as a last resort, in which case the summons via the bailiff had been set out even earlier.
IANAL, but there is at least one fact that links TPB to the Netherlands: ns2.thepiratebay.org is in the Netherlands. I don't know if this is what made the NL court assert authority, or if TPB have more servers there - they used to be based there back in 2006, and tracker.tpb.prq.to[Google Cache] used to be in the Netherlands, but now points to servers in Sweden. (PRQ is the TPB's hosting company.)
So my guess would be that no, the internet isn't collapsing. There is something that links TPB to the Netherlands, and it was sufficient.
I believe they still have some servers there. Not the main ones, but they do have a presence in the Netherlands (trackers?). It started when they were raided way back in '06 (?) and had to move the whole operation there. Since then they moved back to Sweden, but I vaguely recall them still having some hardware there.
ns2.thepiratebay.org is in the Netherlands, for example.
2.3 From the productions deliverd by the prosecution it can be seen that de prosecution has tried to use the central organisation for summoning in Sweden but this didn't work. After this they tried a swedish bailiff which also failed.
2.4 In cases like this a judge can still allow the prosecution to continue if it's plausible that the summoned somehow still did see the summoning even though they never have been officially reached to hand them the summoning.
The prosecution sent mails to the email adresses of the prosecuted and the official owner of thepiratebay.org on 19 and 23 juni 2009. It's plausible the summoned did read the emails since the prosecution have received an email from 1 of these email adresses on 6th may 2009 in which the prosecution has told them they were going to sue.
The prosecution has also sent summonings by facebook and twitter. In these messages were special links to click on to see the swedish translations. Someone with an ip adress from the piratebay has visited this website. The summoned have declared to multiple media that they did not receive a summoning and so that they were not informed. The prosecution does not believe this.
...and evidently the court didn't believe it either. Seems like the usual level of legal skills displayed by TPB. First they have their heads handed to them in Swedish court, now the same has happened with a Dutch court. These people had better get a better legal team, because as it stands now they're being annihilated due to own stupidity - or more likely, by repeatedly basing their defense on a belief that judges are gullible.
I can't help but believe that TPB keeps making these idiot mistakes because they think they're smarter than the court. "Oh we never received the summons because you can't prove it, nyah!" "Well, according to the law, you should have, and according to the law, we can proceed as if you had."
That argument ignores that Google lacks intent, something the court found TPB had, which means that whoever made it hasn't understood the verdict.
They were storing and distributing the.torrent files, which was found to be a case of knowingly aiding and abetting copyright infringement...
A torrent file is technically equivalent to a link. Since linking is not distribution it's technically not forbidden.
I suspect you make the same mistake many tracker operators do. A torrent file may share some attributes with a link, but the big issue here is that some linking is in fact illegal. It's called "aiding and abetting". Google get away with linking to illegal material because they respond to complaints and take down the offending links. (Google for "wolverine torrent" and see the text at the bottom of the page.) If Google didn't clear out links to copyright infringing material, they'd be aiding and abetting, and would also be found guilty.
So stating that a torrent file is equivalent to a link isn't sufficient to get you free - you have to look at the intent behind it.
extemly vague "participation", according to a judge with none to small insight in how the their technology worked
Well, if it is as you say, that the verdict is based on a misunderstanding of what TPB does and how the law works, TPB should have no problem filing an appeal that overturns it. But they haven't. The only thing they've managed is to claim that the judge was biased, but so far nobody has made an argument as to why the reasoning behind the verdict is wrong. Since it's been 3+ months since the verdict, I would have expected something to come up.
Since they where not publishing, nor distributing, any material, they had no obligation to filter it. Linking is not a crime.
They were storing and distributing the.torrent files, which was found to be a case of knowingly aiding and abetting copyright infringement, in line with section 18 of the law regarding electronic commerce. This is what any appeal must overcome.
Having thought a little bit about it, what I think the plan is, is this: The shares of GGF (a micro-cap stock) went up a lot on the press release. I think that's the point, and where the money in all this is.
This is a pump and dump scam.
They're betting on not enough people really reading the press release. Wannabe daytraders put money into the penny stock of GGF and are taken to the cleaners. Where the money goes - well, I don't know. To new nebulous "internet projects", somewhere? Maybe.
GGF is under no obligation to complete the deal. All they have to do is claim "no funding" and the deal is off - but not after the owners of GGF stock has been able to sell it at a much higher price than they would've been able to without this press release.
As I said at the start - this is what I think. I have no proof of anything of the above, but I'm just stating what I think this smells like.
Completion of the acquisitions are primarily subject to GGF obtaining financing for the acquisition
So to summarize: they're buying a company with unknown business model and unknown future legal status, for money they don't have.
I don't see that working out. Usually you at least make sure the seller has something to sell, and the buyer has the ability to buy, before you announce a sale. This is just fantasy so far.
Also very interesting. Taking it at face value that you and the other fellow are correct in your interpretation of Swedish law, it raises the question of why TPB isn't raising a stink about this instead of the nebulous "bias."
The verdict deals with this by stating that it is sufficient for the "main crime" to have been realized in order to prosecute someone for aiding and abetting. There is no need to prosecute the person committing the main crime.
This makes sense to me - suppose you help me get some explosives, and I blow myself up along with a bunch of people, and suppose you knew I was intending to do that. Now, there is no way I can be prosecuted, being dead and all, but it makes sense that you can be.
but they want to index torrents. That's all they do.
...and host the torrent files. Which is why Google isn't getting convicted any time soon.
Well, that and refuse takedown notifications. That's what they stand for. "Copyright is bad."
Well, I think we agree on the problem with copyright nowadays. But there is a right way and a wrong way to fight it. TPB is definitely doing it the wrong way. I thought they were wrong when I realized that they had no legal defense (read the verdict if you haven't), and I think they are even more wrong when they try things like this DDo$.
I think "childish" is a very appropriate label. Like a child that is just throwing a tantrum screaming "I WANT I WANT I WANT", TPB is just throwing a tantrum. They just got smacked down and they just can't understand that the law won't let them do whatever they want. There's no plan or legal strategy - they'll get a re-trial and be ground up the same way again, because while I've heard a lot of complaint regarding the judge's affiliations, nobody has so far pointed out a single thing in the verdict that is or could be wrong.
When Rosa Parks went to court, it wasn't the first time a black lady was tried for that crime - but it was the first time the case was winnable.
If we intend to win, we must be smart and not just passionate. We can continue to fling ourselves against the law, like TPB, and be beaten all the time, or we can fight it smart. It's going to take a while, but patience and endurance are weapons.
Above all, the reasonable-copyright movement must be seen as legitimate and members of lawful society. As someone else said it here on/., someone making off with my TV isn't making a political statement on ownership, he's just stealing my shit. TPB is, in my mind, a lot closer to the "just stealing shit" end of the spectrum than the other end.
The biggest problem with PP (IMO) is that it is a one-issue party. They have no economic, environmental, foreign, labor, healthcare or other policy, meaning that they probably suffer from acute tunnel vision which will lead to bad decisions, even in their primary area, IP.
I find it disconcerting and out of character that they'd suggest such a childish way to pay the fine.
I also find it disconcerting, but I'm more and more believing that it isn't out of character at all.
Some organizations that will publicly condemn actions while silently encouraging them. From what I've seen and read about TPB, I can't rule out that the TPB guys are one of those.
I didn't actually read the article, are the defendants really the ones who suggested this action?
From the article:
The bill inspired anakata to devise a plan involving sending money to Danowskyâ(TM)s law firm, but not to pay the fine of course which they say will never be payed. Anakataâ(TM)s clever plan is called internet-avgift, internet-fee in English. Anakata encourages all Internet users to pay extremely small sums around 1 SEK (0.13 USD) to Danowskyâ(TM)s law firm, which represented the music companies at the Pirate Bay trial.
Civil disobedience may well be the way to go about it, but you have to stand for something good as well. Gandhi was disobedient, but stood for a lawful society, just not one ruled by British. TPB stands for... I don't know. The right to do whatever they want?
You see, every other idea you may have, have already been tried.
Ever tried voting? Forming a political party? To my knowledge, the Pirate Party of Sweden is the first of its kind, so this can't have been tried.
And if you don't want to vote for PP (I don't) - ever tried talking to people, convincing them about the rightness of your cause? Done some good old-fashioned debating? I mean you, yourself?
There is certainly enough wrong with copyright law in Sweden as it stands now, but this Internet mob mentality is not the way to go about it.
Before you start talking about "mob mentality", perhaps one should review the connections between the judge and the anti-piracy boards in the case?
Which is being done by the superior court, all newspapers and the Swedish radio. All of them doing it lawfully and professionally, with no malicious intent.
TPB are hackers. Good, bad, or indifferent, this is nothing more than exploiting a loophole in current payment processing law.
It is exploiting a loophole with malicious intent. If I see you use something that has a security hole in it, I can either warn you, or exploit the hole and fuck you over. Intent matters, even to hackers.
And as far as their wants and needs, things were pretty quiet at TPB prior to this lawsuit, so I really don't see the arrogance there (I mean beyond the atypical hacker mentality towards "normal").
The persistent association of "hacker mentality" with immature and anti-social behavior is probably the biggest hurdle all us computer-people face, and the saddest thing is that we built the hurdle ourselves.
What do you think the persistent use of "just being black" as an excuse for rape and violence would do for racial equality?
Well, this will probably work just as well as that other loophole TPB found - you know, the one that made TPB legal and untouchable in Sweden...
The more I read about the PB guys, the more they appear to be a bunch of arrogant bastards who want a blank check to do whatever they want. There is certainly enough wrong with copyright law in Sweden as it stands now, but this Internet mob mentality is not the way to go about it.
To sum it up, the law firm has been DDOS:ed, the lead lawyer have received threats, as has the head of Sweden's anti-piracy board - and now this. This may be just the stunt for TPB's fans, but if you're trying to reach out to the "other side", and I have, shit like this just makes it harder.
Thanks anakata, or whatever the fuck you want to call yourself, thanks for being a childish dork and fucking everything up.
No, because you need to prove both intent and knowledge.
Intent: TPB's Carl Lundström testified that one of the purposes of TPB was copyright infringement. Knowledge: The court found it proven that TPB knew about the infringing material.
For Google it is not possible to establish intent.
So, according to you, a law prohibiting the distribution of illegal hammers makes the distributor of legal hammers directly responsible for the illegal use of his legal hammers because using said legal hammers illegally somehow makes them illegal,
If you do something illegal with a hammer, that hammer becomes an accessory of a crime, which changes its status in the eyes of the legal system. In the same way, a torrent file isn't illegal - a torrent file used to distribute data illegally is an accessory of a crime.
provided the distributor knew what the use will be, which is not guaranteed.
...but which was proven in the TPB trial, when Carl Lundström testified that one of the purposes of TPB was copyright infringement (piratkopiering).
Look, we can argue analogies endlessly - but I'll have to ask you to back up your next statement with legal references and references to the trial, because I'm beginning to suspect you haven't even read the verdict.
But the judge held that the torrent files are accessories to the main crime of copyright infringement.... That makes them tainted and illegal
By this reasoning, a page that holds a link to a torrent, would also be illegal. Therefore, a page that holds a link to a page that holds a link to a torrent would be illegal. Furthemore, a page that holds a link...
...would make it come down to intent and knowledge of the illegal material. Two points that TPB fell on.
a service provider is responsible for illegal data (like torrent files) stored on their system
Why would files containing otherwise legal things like checksums and file names be illegal exactly? Because they can be used for illegal purposes?
In this case, because they were used for illegal purposes. Not "can be".
But so can almost everything. For instance, I can use a hammer to hit you.
TPB got done for assisting a crime. It is more like what would you do with the guy who bought the hammer you used to hit me, provided he knew that you'd use it for one thing only - to bash my head in.
If the Swedish law allows this in the context of ISPs, then it's absurd.
An ISP that stores information on behalf of a client and serves that information to other clients is required to block or remove illegal information if they are aware of the illegal information. For example, if you're a webhost and one of your customers set up a child porn site on your servers, you are required to block it if you are made aware of it.
(As a side note, TPB did remove child porn.)
If I understand correctly, the professor mentioned in the article says it doesn't, so that answers your question.
Well, I have to affirm my preference for the American system then.
My point was that a certain amount of unauthorized copying is absolutely necessary unless we're going to commit suicide as a society by restricting the flow of culture and information.
The morality of what individuals did on TPB depends on their purpose, the amount of copying, and many other factors. Some of them were morally in the wrong, some of them morally in the right - that must be decided on a case-by-case basis. In both Gessle's and Metallica's case, the amount copied was so small, to so few people, that I consider it part of cultural osmosis.
The question is then what to do with TPB - massive infringement of many, many works, and TPB setting up a business on top of it.
Maybe, but probably not. The court never held that. So if you create a SHA-1 of a copyrighted work and publish it, you'll be in the clear.
But if you create a SHA-1 and use it as a tool to commit copyright infringement, the SHA-1 sum counts as an accessory to the crime.
It's all about how it is used.
It's like a screwdriver. If I buy a screwdriver on your behalf, I'm fine. If I buy a screwdriver on your behalf, knowing that you're going to use it to kill someone, I'm guilty of assisting a crime.
It was also hosting the torrent tracker server that tracks the file chunks users were trading with each other. They offer the torrents, and they offer the server connecting the users
Neither of which are illegal under Swedish law. Under Swedish law, the ONLY people breaking the law are those downloading and uploading the pirated content.
...and those assisting them - "främjar en gärning med råd eller dåd" (for our English readers "furthers an act with advice or deed").
Slashdot Mirror
de prosecution has tried to use the central organisation for summoning in Sweden but this didn't work. After this they tried a swedish bailiff which also failed.
Not surprising since Swedish bureaucracy effectively halts in July due to vacations.
It would appear that the summons were done in June, though - if they sent the emails around when the other channels were tried:
The prosecution sent mails to the email adresses of the prosecuted and the official owner of thepiratebay.org on 19 and 23 juni 2009
It is also possible that the emails were sent as a last resort, in which case the summons via the bailiff had been set out even earlier.
IANAL, but there is at least one fact that links TPB to the Netherlands: ns2.thepiratebay.org is in the Netherlands. I don't know if this is what made the NL court assert authority, or if TPB have more servers there - they used to be based there back in 2006, and tracker.tpb.prq.to[Google Cache] used to be in the Netherlands, but now points to servers in Sweden. (PRQ is the TPB's hosting company.)
So my guess would be that no, the internet isn't collapsing. There is something that links TPB to the Netherlands, and it was sufficient.
Are their servers in the Netherlands?
I believe they still have some servers there. Not the main ones, but they do have a presence in the Netherlands (trackers?). It started when they were raided way back in '06 (?) and had to move the whole operation there. Since then they moved back to Sweden, but I vaguely recall them still having some hardware there.
ns2.thepiratebay.org is in the Netherlands, for example.
From the English translation of the verdict:
2.3 From the productions deliverd by the prosecution it can be seen that de prosecution has tried to use the central organisation for summoning in Sweden but this didn't work. After this they tried a swedish bailiff which also failed.
2.4 In cases like this a judge can still allow the prosecution to continue if it's plausible that the summoned somehow still did see the summoning even though they never have been officially reached to hand them the summoning.
The prosecution sent mails to the email adresses of the prosecuted and the official owner of thepiratebay.org on 19 and 23 juni 2009. It's plausible the summoned did read the emails since the prosecution have received an email from 1 of these email adresses on 6th may 2009 in which the prosecution has told them they were going to sue.
The prosecution has also sent summonings by facebook and twitter. In these messages were special links to click on to see the swedish translations. Someone with an ip adress from the piratebay has visited this website. The summoned have declared to multiple media that they did not receive a summoning and so that they were not informed. The prosecution does not believe this.
...and evidently the court didn't believe it either. Seems like the usual level of legal skills displayed by TPB. First they have their heads handed to them in Swedish court, now the same has happened with a Dutch court. These people had better get a better legal team, because as it stands now they're being annihilated due to own stupidity - or more likely, by repeatedly basing their defense on a belief that judges are gullible.
I can't help but believe that TPB keeps making these idiot mistakes because they think they're smarter than the court. "Oh we never received the summons because you can't prove it, nyah!" "Well, according to the law, you should have, and according to the law, we can proceed as if you had."
so far nobody has made an argument as to why the reasoning behind the verdict is wrong
There has been a lot of arguments against the verdict. One example is that they are just as guilty to "accessory to crime against copyright law" as google is.
That argument ignores that Google lacks intent, something the court found TPB had, which means that whoever made it hasn't understood the verdict.
They were storing and distributing the .torrent files, which was found to be a case of knowingly aiding and abetting copyright infringement...
A torrent file is technically equivalent to a link. Since linking is not distribution it's technically not forbidden.
I suspect you make the same mistake many tracker operators do. A torrent file may share some attributes with a link, but the big issue here is that some linking is in fact illegal. It's called "aiding and abetting". Google get away with linking to illegal material because they respond to complaints and take down the offending links. (Google for "wolverine torrent" and see the text at the bottom of the page.) If Google didn't clear out links to copyright infringing material, they'd be aiding and abetting, and would also be found guilty.
So stating that a torrent file is equivalent to a link isn't sufficient to get you free - you have to look at the intent behind it.
extemly vague "participation", according to a judge with none to small insight in how the their technology worked
Well, if it is as you say, that the verdict is based on a misunderstanding of what TPB does and how the law works, TPB should have no problem filing an appeal that overturns it. But they haven't. The only thing they've managed is to claim that the judge was biased, but so far nobody has made an argument as to why the reasoning behind the verdict is wrong. Since it's been 3+ months since the verdict, I would have expected something to come up.
Since they where not publishing, nor distributing, any material, they had no obligation to filter it. Linking is not a crime.
They were storing and distributing the .torrent files, which was found to be a case of knowingly aiding and abetting copyright infringement, in line with section 18 of the law regarding electronic commerce. This is what any appeal must overcome.
No, I don't think they're that naive.
Having thought a little bit about it, what I think the plan is, is this: The shares of GGF (a micro-cap stock) went up a lot on the press release. I think that's the point, and where the money in all this is.
This is a pump and dump scam.
They're betting on not enough people really reading the press release. Wannabe daytraders put money into the penny stock of GGF and are taken to the cleaners. Where the money goes - well, I don't know. To new nebulous "internet projects", somewhere? Maybe.
GGF is under no obligation to complete the deal. All they have to do is claim "no funding" and the deal is off - but not after the owners of GGF stock has been able to sell it at a much higher price than they would've been able to without this press release.
As I said at the start - this is what I think. I have no proof of anything of the above, but I'm just stating what I think this smells like.
From the press release:
Completion of the acquisitions are primarily subject to GGF obtaining financing for the acquisition
So to summarize: they're buying a company with unknown business model and unknown future legal status, for money they don't have.
I don't see that working out. Usually you at least make sure the seller has something to sell, and the buyer has the ability to buy, before you announce a sale. This is just fantasy so far.
Also very interesting. Taking it at face value that you and the other fellow are correct in your interpretation of Swedish law, it raises the question of why TPB isn't raising a stink about this instead of the nebulous "bias."
The verdict deals with this by stating that it is sufficient for the "main crime" to have been realized in order to prosecute someone for aiding and abetting. There is no need to prosecute the person committing the main crime.
This makes sense to me - suppose you help me get some explosives, and I blow myself up along with a bunch of people, and suppose you knew I was intending to do that. Now, there is no way I can be prosecuted, being dead and all, but it makes sense that you can be.
but they want to index torrents. That's all they do.
...and host the torrent files. Which is why Google isn't getting convicted any time soon.
Well, that and refuse takedown notifications. That's what they stand for. "Copyright is bad."
Well, I think we agree on the problem with copyright nowadays. But there is a right way and a wrong way to fight it. TPB is definitely doing it the wrong way. I thought they were wrong when I realized that they had no legal defense (read the verdict if you haven't), and I think they are even more wrong when they try things like this DDo$.
I think "childish" is a very appropriate label. Like a child that is just throwing a tantrum screaming "I WANT I WANT I WANT", TPB is just throwing a tantrum. They just got smacked down and they just can't understand that the law won't let them do whatever they want. There's no plan or legal strategy - they'll get a re-trial and be ground up the same way again, because while I've heard a lot of complaint regarding the judge's affiliations, nobody has so far pointed out a single thing in the verdict that is or could be wrong.
When Rosa Parks went to court, it wasn't the first time a black lady was tried for that crime - but it was the first time the case was winnable.
If we intend to win, we must be smart and not just passionate. We can continue to fling ourselves against the law, like TPB, and be beaten all the time, or we can fight it smart. It's going to take a while, but patience and endurance are weapons.
Above all, the reasonable-copyright movement must be seen as legitimate and members of lawful society. As someone else said it here on /., someone making off with my TV isn't making a political statement on ownership, he's just stealing my shit. TPB is, in my mind, a lot closer to the "just stealing shit" end of the spectrum than the other end.
The biggest problem with PP (IMO) is that it is a one-issue party. They have no economic, environmental, foreign, labor, healthcare or other policy, meaning that they probably suffer from acute tunnel vision which will lead to bad decisions, even in their primary area, IP.
I find it disconcerting and out of character that they'd suggest such a childish way to pay the fine.
I also find it disconcerting, but I'm more and more believing that it isn't out of character at all.
Some organizations that will publicly condemn actions while silently encouraging them. From what I've seen and read about TPB, I can't rule out that the TPB guys are one of those.
I didn't actually read the article, are the defendants really the ones who suggested this action?
From the article:
The bill inspired anakata to devise a plan involving sending money to Danowskyâ(TM)s law firm, but not to pay the fine of course which they say will never be payed. Anakataâ(TM)s clever plan is called internet-avgift, internet-fee in English. Anakata encourages all Internet users to pay extremely small sums around 1 SEK (0.13 USD) to Danowskyâ(TM)s law firm, which represented the music companies at the Pirate Bay trial.
So, yes, this is from TPB.
Then smart ass, what is the way to go about it?
Civil disobedience may well be the way to go about it, but you have to stand for something good as well. Gandhi was disobedient, but stood for a lawful society, just not one ruled by British. TPB stands for... I don't know. The right to do whatever they want?
You see, every other idea you may have, have already been tried.
Ever tried voting? Forming a political party? To my knowledge, the Pirate Party of Sweden is the first of its kind, so this can't have been tried.
And if you don't want to vote for PP (I don't) - ever tried talking to people, convincing them about the rightness of your cause? Done some good old-fashioned debating? I mean you, yourself?
There is certainly enough wrong with copyright law in Sweden as it stands now, but this Internet mob mentality is not the way to go about it.
Before you start talking about "mob mentality", perhaps one should review the connections between the judge and the anti-piracy boards in the case?
Which is being done by the superior court, all newspapers and the Swedish radio. All of them doing it lawfully and professionally, with no malicious intent.
TPB are hackers. Good, bad, or indifferent, this is nothing more than exploiting a loophole in current payment processing law.
It is exploiting a loophole with malicious intent. If I see you use something that has a security hole in it, I can either warn you, or exploit the hole and fuck you over. Intent matters, even to hackers.
And as far as their wants and needs, things were pretty quiet at TPB prior to this lawsuit, so I really don't see the arrogance there (I mean beyond the atypical hacker mentality towards "normal").
The persistent association of "hacker mentality" with immature and anti-social behavior is probably the biggest hurdle all us computer-people face, and the saddest thing is that we built the hurdle ourselves.
What do you think the persistent use of "just being black" as an excuse for rape and violence would do for racial equality?
If you participate in this you run the risk of being found guilty of whatever crime "annoying law firms" sort under. I have no idea.
But I'm fairly certain that claiming a "wrong payment" when the payment was 100% intended is fraud.
Well, this will probably work just as well as that other loophole TPB found - you know, the one that made TPB legal and untouchable in Sweden...
The more I read about the PB guys, the more they appear to be a bunch of arrogant bastards who want a blank check to do whatever they want. There is certainly enough wrong with copyright law in Sweden as it stands now, but this Internet mob mentality is not the way to go about it.
To sum it up, the law firm has been DDOS:ed, the lead lawyer have received threats, as has the head of Sweden's anti-piracy board - and now this. This may be just the stunt for TPB's fans, but if you're trying to reach out to the "other side", and I have, shit like this just makes it harder.
Thanks anakata, or whatever the fuck you want to call yourself, thanks for being a childish dork and fucking everything up.
No, because you need to prove both intent and knowledge.
Intent: TPB's Carl Lundström testified that one of the purposes of TPB was copyright infringement. Knowledge: The court found it proven that TPB knew about the infringing material.
For Google it is not possible to establish intent.
So, according to you, a law prohibiting the distribution of illegal hammers makes the distributor of legal hammers directly responsible for the illegal use of his legal hammers because using said legal hammers illegally somehow makes them illegal,
If you do something illegal with a hammer, that hammer becomes an accessory of a crime, which changes its status in the eyes of the legal system. In the same way, a torrent file isn't illegal - a torrent file used to distribute data illegally is an accessory of a crime.
provided the distributor knew what the use will be, which is not guaranteed.
...but which was proven in the TPB trial, when Carl Lundström testified that one of the purposes of TPB was copyright infringement (piratkopiering).
Look, we can argue analogies endlessly - but I'll have to ask you to back up your next statement with legal references and references to the trial, because I'm beginning to suspect you haven't even read the verdict.
that's why there's an appeal process, multiple levels of courts, etc, etc.
...and juries, multiple judges, etc.
But the judge held that the torrent files are accessories to the main crime of copyright infringement .... That makes them tainted and illegal
By this reasoning, a page that holds a link to a torrent, would also be illegal. Therefore, a page that holds a link to a page that holds a link to a torrent would be illegal. Furthemore, a page that holds a link ...
...would make it come down to intent and knowledge of the illegal material. Two points that TPB fell on.
Why would files containing otherwise legal things like checksums and file names be illegal exactly? Because they can be used for illegal purposes?
In this case, because they were used for illegal purposes. Not "can be".
But so can almost everything. For instance, I can use a hammer to hit you.
TPB got done for assisting a crime. It is more like what would you do with the guy who bought the hammer you used to hit me, provided he knew that you'd use it for one thing only - to bash my head in.
If the Swedish law allows this in the context of ISPs, then it's absurd.
An ISP that stores information on behalf of a client and serves that information to other clients is required to block or remove illegal information if they are aware of the illegal information. For example, if you're a webhost and one of your customers set up a child porn site on your servers, you are required to block it if you are made aware of it.
(As a side note, TPB did remove child porn.)
If I understand correctly, the professor mentioned in the article says it doesn't, so that answers your question.
No, he doesn't.
Well, I have to affirm my preference for the American system then.
My point was that a certain amount of unauthorized copying is absolutely necessary unless we're going to commit suicide as a society by restricting the flow of culture and information.
The morality of what individuals did on TPB depends on their purpose, the amount of copying, and many other factors. Some of them were morally in the wrong, some of them morally in the right - that must be decided on a case-by-case basis. In both Gessle's and Metallica's case, the amount copied was so small, to so few people, that I consider it part of cultural osmosis.
The question is then what to do with TPB - massive infringement of many, many works, and TPB setting up a business on top of it.
Maybe, but probably not. The court never held that. So if you create a SHA-1 of a copyrighted work and publish it, you'll be in the clear.
But if you create a SHA-1 and use it as a tool to commit copyright infringement, the SHA-1 sum counts as an accessory to the crime.
It's all about how it is used.
It's like a screwdriver. If I buy a screwdriver on your behalf, I'm fine. If I buy a screwdriver on your behalf, knowing that you're going to use it to kill someone, I'm guilty of assisting a crime.
It was also hosting the torrent tracker server that tracks the file chunks users were trading with each other. They offer the torrents, and they offer the server connecting the users
Neither of which are illegal under Swedish law. Under Swedish law, the ONLY people breaking the law are those downloading and uploading the pirated content.
...and those assisting them - "främjar en gärning med råd eller dåd" (for our English readers "furthers an act with advice or deed").
Which is what TPB got done for.