Some of the suggestions above says that you should just chuck everything haphazardly into a big pile and then use search engines to trawl the whole mess. I don't buy that. Instead, (like some others) I'd suggest a proper content management system such as the ones from http://www.alfresco.com/, http://www.interwoven.com/ or http://www.hummingbird.com/.
The reason for this suggestion is that I know that these systems are being used by organisations which handle, as OP said, hundreds of thousands of documents and which have satellite offices (e.g. large multinational lawfirms). They provide several benefits such as the possibility to structure projects, have both project related documents and e-mails saved and indexed in the project folders, allows for searching and proper document version chains (meaning that you can revert to older versions of documents if some klutz breaks a newer version).
Of course, this means quite an investment, a learning curve for everyone at your company and, most likely, the hiring of an individual with experience of the chosen system.
I translated the "application for summons" a while ago. It charges the four defendants with two different crimes. (It may have been adjusted by the prosecutor since it was released, but this is the last version I've seen.)
The accusatory part (or "crime description") of the application reads (unofficial translation):
1) Complicity to copyright infringement
"The Pirate Bay is one of the worlds largest Internet filesharing services. The service utilizes the BitTorrent-protocol to achieve an efficient use of the available bandwidth. The Pirate Bay consists of three components, an index portal in the form of a web page with a search function, a database with a catalogue of torrent-files and a tracker function. Through the tracker function, a peer-to-peer network is created by the users interested in sharing the same file. All components are necessary to enable the users to share files between them. The greater part of the files which are made available for file sharing through The Pirate Bay contain copyrighted works.
The operations of The Pirate Bay are financed by advertising. Hereby, there is a commercial use of copyrighted works.
[The defendants] have together and in mutual understanding with each other and together with one other individual during 1 July 2005 - 31 May 2006 [at locations] been responsible for the organisation, administration, systematisation, programming, financing and operations of the file sharing service The Pirate Bay. In connection with these activities they have aided other persons' copyright infringements as follows:
The defendants have wilfully [during time period] [at locations] aided others in the transferring of a file over the Internet containing [name of copyrighted work], thereby making a copyrighted work available to the public and also aided other persons in manufacturing copies of the work. [Explanation why this is a copyright infringement.]
[This is repeated in a list of 21 phonograms (i.e. records/CDs), 9 films and 4 computer games shared and downloaded.]
and
2) Preparation for copyright infringement
[The defendants] have together and in mutual understanding with each other and together with one other individual during 1 July 2005 - 31 May 2006 [at locations] been responsible for the organisation, administration, systematisation, programming, financing and operations of the file sharing service The Pirate Bay.
In connection with these activities they have, by the functionality of the file sharing service, in a purpose build database with ancillary catalogue, received and stored the torrentfiles referred to [in the above list of copyrighted works]. The torrent files have been especially adapted to be used as means of assistance in the violation of the [Swedish Copyright Act]."
EasyTarget is correct. If anyone is interested, the application for summons charge the four defendants with two different crimes. (Reposted it here since it seemed in line with the discussion. I hope that is ok.)
The accusatory part (or "crime description") of the application reads (unnofficial translation):
1) Complicity to copyright infringement
"The Pirate Bay is one of the worlds largest Internet filesharing services. The service utilizes the BitTorrent-protocol to achieve an efficient use of the available bandwith. The Pirate Bay consists of three components, an indexportal in the form of a webpage with a search function, a database with a catalog of torrent-files and a tracker function. Through the tracker fucnction, a peer-to-peer network is created by the users interested in sharing the same file. All components are neccessary to enable the users to share files between them. The greater part of the files which are made available for filesharing through The Pirate Bay contain copyrighted works.
The operations of The Pirate Bay are financed by advertising. Hereby, there is a commercial use of copyrighted works.
[The defendants] have together and in mutual understanding with each other and together with one other individual during 1 July 2005 - 31 May 2006 [at locations] been responsible for the organisation, administration, systematisation, programming, financing and operations of the filesharing service The Pirate Bay. In connection with these activities they have aided other persons' copyright infringements as follows:
The defendants have willfully [during time period] [at locations] aided others in the transferring of a file over the Internet containing [name of copyrighted work], thereby making a copyrighted work available to the public and also aided other persons in manufacturing copies of the work. [Explanation why this is a copyright infringement.]
[This is repeated in a list of 21 phonograms (i.e. records/CDs), 9 films and 4 computer games shared and downloaded.]
and
2) Preparation for copyright infringement
[The defendants] have together and in mutual understanding with each other and together with one other individual during 1 July 2005 - 31 May 2006 [at locations] been responsible for the organisation, administration, systematisation, programming, financing and operations of the filesharing service The Pirate Bay.
In connection with these activities they have, by the functionality of the filesharing service, in a purpose build database with ancillary catalog, received and stored the torrentfiles referred to [in the above list of copyrighted works]. The torrent files have been especially adapted to be used as means of assistance in the violation of the [Swedish Copyright Act]."
If anyone is interested, the application for summons charge the four defendants with two different crimes.
The accusatory part (or "crime description") of the application reads (unnofficial translation):
1) Complicity to copyright infringement
"The Pirate Bay is one of the worlds largest Internet filesharing services. The service utilizes the BitTorrent-protocol to achieve an efficient use of the available bandwith. The Pirate Bay consists of three components, an indexportal in the form of a webpage with a search function, a database with a catalog of torrent-files and a tracker function. Through the tracker fucnction, a peer-to-peer network is created by the users interested in sharing the same file. All components are neccessary to enable the users to share files between them. The greater part of the files which are made available for filesharing through The Pirate Bay contain copyrighted works.
The operations of The Pirate Bay are financed by advertising. Hereby, there is a commercial use of copyrighted works.
[The defendants] have together and in mutual understanding with each other and together with one other individual during 1 July 2005 - 31 May 2006 [at locations] been responsible for the organisation, administration, systematisation, programming, financing and operations of the filesharing service The Pirate Bay. In connection with these activities they have aided other persons' copyright infringements as follows:
The defendants have willfully [during time period] [at locations] aided others in the transferring of a file over the Internet containing [name of copyrighted work], thereby making a copyrighted work available to the public and also aided other persons in manufacturing copies of the work. [Explanation why this is a copyright infringement.]
[This is repeated in a list of 21 phonograms (i.e. records/CDs), 9 films and 4 computer games shared and downloaded.]
and
2) Preparation for copyright infringement
[The defendants] have together and in mutual understanding with each other and together with one other individual during 1 July 2005 - 31 May 2006 [at locations] been responsible for the organisation, administration, systematisation, programming, financing and operations of the filesharing service The Pirate Bay.
In connection with these activities they have, by the functionality of the filesharing service, in a purpose build database with ancillary catalog, received and stored the torrentfiles referred to [in the above list of copyrighted works]. The torrent files have been especially adapted to be used as means of assistance in the violation of the [Swedish Copyright Act]."
True, ISPs should help make the Net idiot-proof, but some ISPs also see their main job to make more $$$.
Therefore, with the increased number of users with more bandwith than brains, the Net will get bogged down and ISPs will start thinking "What to do? What to do?". Sure, they might want to help average-Joe, but they also want to make a profit.
Consequently, it is my solemn prediction that we will see a lot more
QoS stuff going on. I.e. ISPs will try to make more money be offering "dedicated" services or "garanteed" bandwith to those with more money than brains (or to those who actually need to use the web for good things). In the end, they will want to implement QoS in IPv6 and charge people accordingly.
So, after they've helped put guns in the hands of children (read:bandwith in the hands of average-Joe), the ISPs will turn around and profit from the plight of their victims. Bastards!
Imho, as to whether or not the Net can be regulated, the answer is a definite yes!
What most people (even tech-nerds!) seem to forget is that the Net is not a static system. The reason why the Net has been so difficult to regulate in the past is because of the way it is built.
Therefore, as was put by Lawrence Lessig in his book Code and Other Laws of Cyberspace because the Net is a completely artificial environment, the only thing you have to do is to change the environment. Then, hey presto, you can regulate that which was previously impossible to regulate (Palladium, anyone?
For example, IPv6 with geographical pin-pointing built into it could easily make us subject only to national laws again. (Or at least the people who don't know about anonymous proxies.)
Now, the US still has a lot of power over the Net and perhaps it would be possible for the US to enforce its wishes on other nations by using it's power over the Net's architecture, but it may become more difficult, the wider the Net spreads out. It may also fracture the apparent unity of the Net, and result in many "small" Nets run by different countries or groups of countries. All with their own architecture, and therefore, all with different ways of regulating it.
As for me, I don't think it would be a good idea, but my yes, it is unfortunately possible to regulate the Net. 1984, here we come...
Slashdot Mirror
Some of the suggestions above says that you should just chuck everything haphazardly into a big pile and then use search engines to trawl the whole mess. I don't buy that. Instead, (like some others) I'd suggest a proper content management system such as the ones from http://www.alfresco.com/, http://www.interwoven.com/ or http://www.hummingbird.com/.
The reason for this suggestion is that I know that these systems are being used by organisations which handle, as OP said, hundreds of thousands of documents and which have satellite offices (e.g. large multinational lawfirms). They provide several benefits such as the possibility to structure projects, have both project related documents and e-mails saved and indexed in the project folders, allows for searching and proper document version chains (meaning that you can revert to older versions of documents if some klutz breaks a newer version).
Of course, this means quite an investment, a learning curve for everyone at your company and, most likely, the hiring of an individual with experience of the chosen system.
I translated the "application for summons" a while ago. It charges the four defendants with two different crimes. (It may have been adjusted by the prosecutor since it was released, but this is the last version I've seen.)
The accusatory part (or "crime description") of the application reads (unofficial translation):
1) Complicity to copyright infringement
"The Pirate Bay is one of the worlds largest Internet filesharing services. The service utilizes the BitTorrent-protocol to achieve an efficient use of the available bandwidth. The Pirate Bay consists of three components, an index portal in the form of a web page with a search function, a database with a catalogue of torrent-files and a tracker function. Through the tracker function, a peer-to-peer network is created by the users interested in sharing the same file. All components are necessary to enable the users to share files between them. The greater part of the files which are made available for file sharing through The Pirate Bay contain copyrighted works.
The operations of The Pirate Bay are financed by advertising. Hereby, there is a commercial use of copyrighted works.
[The defendants] have together and in mutual understanding with each other and together with one other individual during 1 July 2005 - 31 May 2006 [at locations] been responsible for the organisation, administration, systematisation, programming, financing and operations of the file sharing service The Pirate Bay. In connection with these activities they have aided other persons' copyright infringements as follows:
The defendants have wilfully [during time period] [at locations] aided others in the transferring of a file over the Internet containing [name of copyrighted work], thereby making a copyrighted work available to the public and also aided other persons in manufacturing copies of the work. [Explanation why this is a copyright infringement.]
[This is repeated in a list of 21 phonograms (i.e. records/CDs), 9 films and 4 computer games shared and downloaded.]
and
2) Preparation for copyright infringement
[The defendants] have together and in mutual understanding with each other and together with one other individual during 1 July 2005 - 31 May 2006 [at locations] been responsible for the organisation, administration, systematisation, programming, financing and operations of the file sharing service The Pirate Bay.
In connection with these activities they have, by the functionality of the file sharing service, in a purpose build database with ancillary catalogue, received and stored the torrentfiles referred to [in the above list of copyrighted works]. The torrent files have been especially adapted to be used as means of assistance in the violation of the [Swedish Copyright Act]."
EasyTarget is correct. If anyone is interested, the application for summons charge the four defendants with two different crimes. (Reposted it here since it seemed in line with the discussion. I hope that is ok.)
The accusatory part (or "crime description") of the application reads (unnofficial translation):
1) Complicity to copyright infringement
"The Pirate Bay is one of the worlds largest Internet filesharing services. The service utilizes the BitTorrent-protocol to achieve an efficient use of the available bandwith. The Pirate Bay consists of three components, an indexportal in the form of a webpage with a search function, a database with a catalog of torrent-files and a tracker function. Through the tracker fucnction, a peer-to-peer network is created by the users interested in sharing the same file. All components are neccessary to enable the users to share files between them. The greater part of the files which are made available for filesharing through The Pirate Bay contain copyrighted works.
The operations of The Pirate Bay are financed by advertising. Hereby, there is a commercial use of copyrighted works.
[The defendants] have together and in mutual understanding with each other and together with one other individual during 1 July 2005 - 31 May 2006 [at locations] been responsible for the organisation, administration, systematisation, programming, financing and operations of the filesharing service The Pirate Bay. In connection with these activities they have aided other persons' copyright infringements as follows:
The defendants have willfully [during time period] [at locations] aided others in the transferring of a file over the Internet containing [name of copyrighted work], thereby making a copyrighted work available to the public and also aided other persons in manufacturing copies of the work. [Explanation why this is a copyright infringement.]
[This is repeated in a list of 21 phonograms (i.e. records/CDs), 9 films and 4 computer games shared and downloaded.]
and
2) Preparation for copyright infringement
[The defendants] have together and in mutual understanding with each other and together with one other individual during 1 July 2005 - 31 May 2006 [at locations] been responsible for the organisation, administration, systematisation, programming, financing and operations of the filesharing service The Pirate Bay.
In connection with these activities they have, by the functionality of the filesharing service, in a purpose build database with ancillary catalog, received and stored the torrentfiles referred to [in the above list of copyrighted works]. The torrent files have been especially adapted to be used as means of assistance in the violation of the [Swedish Copyright Act]."
If anyone is interested, the application for summons charge the four defendants with two different crimes.
The accusatory part (or "crime description") of the application reads (unnofficial translation):
1) Complicity to copyright infringement
"The Pirate Bay is one of the worlds largest Internet filesharing services. The service utilizes the BitTorrent-protocol to achieve an efficient use of the available bandwith. The Pirate Bay consists of three components, an indexportal in the form of a webpage with a search function, a database with a catalog of torrent-files and a tracker function. Through the tracker fucnction, a peer-to-peer network is created by the users interested in sharing the same file. All components are neccessary to enable the users to share files between them. The greater part of the files which are made available for filesharing through The Pirate Bay contain copyrighted works.
The operations of The Pirate Bay are financed by advertising. Hereby, there is a commercial use of copyrighted works.
[The defendants] have together and in mutual understanding with each other and together with one other individual during 1 July 2005 - 31 May 2006 [at locations] been responsible for the organisation, administration, systematisation, programming, financing and operations of the filesharing service The Pirate Bay. In connection with these activities they have aided other persons' copyright infringements as follows:
The defendants have willfully [during time period] [at locations] aided others in the transferring of a file over the Internet containing [name of copyrighted work], thereby making a copyrighted work available to the public and also aided other persons in manufacturing copies of the work. [Explanation why this is a copyright infringement.]
[This is repeated in a list of 21 phonograms (i.e. records/CDs), 9 films and 4 computer games shared and downloaded.]
and
2) Preparation for copyright infringement
[The defendants] have together and in mutual understanding with each other and together with one other individual during 1 July 2005 - 31 May 2006 [at locations] been responsible for the organisation, administration, systematisation, programming, financing and operations of the filesharing service The Pirate Bay.
In connection with these activities they have, by the functionality of the filesharing service, in a purpose build database with ancillary catalog, received and stored the torrentfiles referred to [in the above list of copyrighted works]. The torrent files have been especially adapted to be used as means of assistance in the violation of the [Swedish Copyright Act]."
Hmm... Is this good enough http://liewcf.com/wp/archives/2005/01/pchome-touch -1-skype-usb-phone/? Ok, so you still have to have your computer on (and live in Tawian), but what the hey.
True, ISPs should help make the Net idiot-proof, but some ISPs also see their main job to make more $$$.
Therefore, with the increased number of users with more bandwith than brains, the Net will get bogged down and ISPs will start thinking "What to do? What to do?". Sure, they might want to help average-Joe, but they also want to make a profit.
Consequently, it is my solemn prediction that we will see a lot more QoS stuff going on. I.e. ISPs will try to make more money be offering "dedicated" services or "garanteed" bandwith to those with more money than brains (or to those who actually need to use the web for good things). In the end, they will want to implement QoS in IPv6 and charge people accordingly.
So, after they've helped put guns in the hands of children (read:bandwith in the hands of average-Joe), the ISPs will turn around and profit from the plight of their victims. Bastards!
What most people (even tech-nerds!) seem to forget is that the Net is not a static system. The reason why the Net has been so difficult to regulate in the past is because of the way it is built.
Therefore, as was put by Lawrence Lessig in his book Code and Other Laws of Cyberspace because the Net is a completely artificial environment, the only thing you have to do is to change the environment. Then, hey presto, you can regulate that which was previously impossible to regulate (Palladium, anyone?
For example, IPv6 with geographical pin-pointing built into it could easily make us subject only to national laws again. (Or at least the people who don't know about anonymous proxies.)
Now, the US still has a lot of power over the Net and perhaps it would be possible for the US to enforce its wishes on other nations by using it's power over the Net's architecture, but it may become more difficult, the wider the Net spreads out. It may also fracture the apparent unity of the Net, and result in many "small" Nets run by different countries or groups of countries. All with their own architecture, and therefore, all with different ways of regulating it.
As for me, I don't think it would be a good idea, but my yes, it is unfortunately possible to regulate the Net. 1984, here we come...