Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

The Pirate Bay Is Making a "Spectrial" of It

kdawson posted more than 5 years ago | from the step-right-up dept.

The Courts 406

IDOXLR8 writes "The Harvard Law students defending accused file-swapper Joel Tenenbaum are doing their best to turn his upcoming trial into a media event. But when it comes to pure spectacle, they have nothing on The Pirate Bay. TPB is referring to the event as a 'spectrial,' a cross between a spectacle and a trial. They have set up a site where you can track their current location, complete with journal entries. The trial begins next Monday and features a live audio feed and Twitter translations."

cancel ×

406 comments

I hope P.B. win this trial (5, Insightful)

Maelwryth (982896) | more than 5 years ago | (#26861647)

It might make media realise that we have separate countries for a reason, and that many of those reasons have an equal validity.

Re:I hope P.B. win this trial (5, Interesting)

Z00L00K (682162) | more than 5 years ago | (#26861685)

This trial is in itself important for the net, since TPB didn't carry the content themselves, just references to it.

This means that if they are convicted it may be illegal to have links to questionable content.

If they aren't convicted it will require a different approach by authorities, the record and movie industry to figure out a way to manage their income.

This is far from over.

Re:I hope P.B. win this trial (4, Insightful)

Maelwryth (982896) | more than 5 years ago | (#26861717)

"This is far from over."

Unfortunately that may be true. This looks like one of those cases where if they don't win they will try again, all the while trying to change the rules to make it impossible to lose. It is starting to look like media sharing is the cannabis of the new millennium (or at least the first part :)).

Re:I hope P.B. win this trial (4, Funny)

wisty (1335733) | more than 5 years ago | (#26861831)

And if that fails, they will come back with an armada of gunships, a kraken, an undead monkey, and the accursed souls who were lost at sea. These guys just won't give up.

Re:I hope P.B. win this trial (0, Offtopic)

Hal_Porter (817932) | more than 5 years ago | (#26861905)

But I thought I had a right to watch Underworld 3 without having to pay rental fees at Blockbuster?

Re:I hope P.B. win this trial (1)

KlomDark (6370) | more than 5 years ago | (#26862259)

"Or at least the first part" - It's nearly morning here, so give me a break, but I totally cannot figure out what "the first part" means?

Still thinking before I post and look stupid. But I guess I am, here comes the click. :)

Re:I hope P.B. win this trial (2, Informative)

scientus (1357317) | more than 5 years ago | (#26861809)

IN THE CONTEXT OF SWEDEN

law in one country does not automatically decome law in another country!

Re:I hope P.B. win this trial (0, Redundant)

invisibleairwaves (1266542) | more than 5 years ago | (#26861813)

Damn. [questionablecontent.net]

Re:I hope P.B. win this trial (4, Interesting)

timmarhy (659436) | more than 5 years ago | (#26861827)

why is there this preconception that linking to content that you know full well is illegal, is acceptable?

i'm yet to see a good defense for this. your an accessory to a crime if you knowingly aid it.

Re:I hope P.B. win this trial (3, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26861845)

There is a fantastic defense for this.
In Sweden, the link isn't the illegal content, and is therefore legal.
Besides, if it weren't, any sort of search engine would then be liable unless they had a 100% effective filter. (That's as likely as finding out that aspirin is a cure for syphilis.)

Re:I hope P.B. win this trial (5, Insightful)

timmarhy (659436) | more than 5 years ago | (#26861861)

intent is where TPB crosses this line imho. google bot just index's everything, where these guys purposely set out to create a list of infringing downloads.

i'm sure you could muddy the waters plenty, but at the end of the day illegal downloads are what TPB is all about.

Re:I hope P.B. win this trial (4, Interesting)

Brian Gordon (987471) | more than 5 years ago | (#26861871)

That's preposterous, copyright infringement is illegal but "aiding" people in copyright infringement is not. It's that simple.

Re:I hope P.B. win this trial (-1, Flamebait)

timmarhy (659436) | more than 5 years ago | (#26861915)

really so that guy selling bootlegs on the street is legit? give me a break.

Re:I hope P.B. win this trial (5, Insightful)

Renegade88 (874837) | more than 5 years ago | (#26861955)

He did not say that. Obviously the street-seller engaged actively in copyright infringement, either copying it himself or distributing physical copies.

If you cross me on the street asking about bootlegs, and I point you in the direction of the street-seller, am I guilty of aiding copyright infringement? Most reasonable people don't think so.

Re:I hope P.B. win this trial (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26861935)

I'd love to hear your argument on how wilfully aiding copyright infringement should somehow not be punishable by law when wilfully infringing it is.

It's almost like saying "Yeah, he might have handed the guy a hammer and then watched and laughed, but he didn't beat that woman to death. Let him off!"

Re:I hope P.B. win this trial (3, Informative)

Brian Gordon (987471) | more than 5 years ago | (#26862045)

What? In America we have something called you shouldn't go to jail if you didn't do anything wrong. If you look out your window and someone's being stabbed [wikipedia.org] you can pour a glass of lemonade and set out a lawn chair for all we care, you are not liable. See Duty to rescue [wikipedia.org] . It doesn't go over the reasoning behind it, but this article [wisc.edu] does. It's pretty dense but I think the issue really boils down to beliefs about our responsibilities to each other. Although we do have welfare tacked on, we're at least supposedly a cold, heartless capitalist regime with no qualms about suppressing and exploiting the poor because that's their place.. unlike more socialist states like the EU. We can hardly feel completely inculpable if a poor person we pass every day starves (that's not to say many people wouldn't intervene) in this dog-eat-dog game of bottom lines without holding these kind of ideas about duty to rescue in more pressing circumstances.

Re:I hope P.B. win this trial (1)

GreenTech11 (1471589) | more than 5 years ago | (#26862061)

I pity the person who sets out a lawnchair, 'cause they're next!

Re:I hope P.B. win this trial (3, Insightful)

Jurily (900488) | more than 5 years ago | (#26862063)

It's almost like saying "Yeah, he might have handed the guy a hammer and then watched and laughed, but he didn't beat that woman to death. Let him off!"

Keyword: almost. Except one is a crime, and against basically every moral code ever conceived by man.

Copying, on the other hand is absolutely natural. There was no concept of copyright until printing became semi-widely available, and it was originally meant to protect a select few who could afford a printing machine from each other.

You make "willingly aiding copyright infringement" sound like they're a bunch of pedophiles. Now go ahead and tell me that all the music to listen to came from a store.

Re:I hope P.B. win this trial (3, Insightful)

pipatron (966506) | more than 5 years ago | (#26862049)

intent is where TPB crosses this line imho. google bot just index's everything, where these guys purposely set out to create a list of infringing downloads.

False.

They are set out to create a list of information that is not censored or removed because some random guy in another country believes it to be illegal.

The reason there are a lot of torrents to content that might be illegal for the original uploader to redistribute, is that for example linux ISOs are already tracked elsewhere, there's no need to put them there.

Re:I hope P.B. win this trial (0)

Kijori (897770) | more than 5 years ago | (#26861883)

There's a pretty big difference between Google and thepiratebay though. While they both link to both illicit and legal content, TPB's business is providing links to illegal downloads. I mean, it's called The Pirate Bay! As proof I submit the "Linux test". Linux is often touted as a legal use of Bittorrent. So go to http://thepiratebay.org/ [thepiratebay.org] and search for "Linux". At the time of writing, the top 10 results contain one legal download (Mono), and eight illegal ones! I would suggest that the fact that even searching for what is often claimed as the most important legal use of BT turns up an overwhelming majority of illegal downloads shows fairly clearly what the intended purpose of TPB really is.

Re:I hope P.B. win this trial (2, Interesting)

Jah-Wren Ryel (80510) | more than 5 years ago | (#26861997)

That's a pretty weak-ass "linux test" - first off, unless you are using something I don't know about, the search engine at the pirate bay just returns results in LIFO order, nothing about "top 10" So all you've done is show that the most recent 10 items with the word "linux" somewhere in the description box are probably copyright violations. You would have done much better to actually find all the legitimate linux torrents on the site and then make a traffic comparison to torrents of copy-forbidden works.

Re:I hope P.B. win this trial (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26862075)

Not to mention that if you search for Ubuntu, you get a number of hits for ISOs that do not have 'linux' in the description anywhere. Same with Fedora. I pretty much gave up remembering distro names at that point.

Re:I hope P.B. win this trial (2, Interesting)

pipatron (966506) | more than 5 years ago | (#26862065)

TPB is not a business, it's a couple of guys with a lot of servers that do what they want.

The linux test is also quite retarded, since almost all linux distributions have their own trackers, there's no need to put them on TPB. It doesn't matter how much illegal content there is, the fact that you even found one "legal download" (remember, nothing is stored on TPB, they do not perform any infringement) shows that it's not meant for breaking the law, it's meant for sharing information, no matter if sharing it happens to be illegal in some country or morality.

Re:I hope P.B. win this trial (2, Insightful)

Znork (31774) | more than 5 years ago | (#26862077)

it's called The Pirate Bay!

On the other hand, it's not called 'the copyright infringement bay', nor are they accused of boarding ships on the high seas, so I'm not sure it's appropriate to draw any conclusions from that.

I'd say it's more a tongue-in-cheek naming poking fun at expected users and preempting expected name-calling.

shows fairly clearly what the intended purpose of TPB really is.

Providing and indexing links to the material the users want? It is, perhaps, a bit saddening that not more links were pointing to legitimate linux torrents (altho I suspect that is more because linux torrents have specific release sites that are well known to users, and the vast majority of linux programs are fed through packaging systems rather than random download sites).

I have no doubt that were the majority of the users of TPB mainly interested in Linux distributions, that's what you'd see. Which indicates that the material found is not so much a reflection of intent on the part of the site, but rather a reflection of the desire of the users.

Re:I hope P.B. win this trial (2, Interesting)

91degrees (207121) | more than 5 years ago | (#26862245)

I think Google can reasonably argue that they try to link to legal content. The evidence for this is that the majority of the content appears to be legal, and if someone provides evidence that a link is illegal they will typically remove it.

I think the pirate bay cannot reasonably make this argument. The majority of the content appears illegal and if someone provides incontravertible proof that the link is illegal they'll send a smug insulting response.

INTENT MATTERS!!!!!!

Re:I hope P.B. win this trial (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26861899)

I've yet to see anything interesting posted by someone who can't spell "you're" and refuses to use capital letters.

Get off my internet.

Re:I hope P.B. win this trial (4, Insightful)

blahplusplus (757119) | more than 5 years ago | (#26861909)

"i'm yet to see a good defense for this."

Like there's a good defense of endless copyright extension and patent trolling?

Like there's a good defense of sweatshops in the third world?

Like there's a good defense for an illegal war in IRAQ?

I could go on, but lets face it. When has anyone fought what the majority of people want and won?

Trying to act like a resource is scarce when it is not is part of the whole problem to begin with, once made, digital works are not scarce and can always fulfill supply. They are the perfect product to fit a socialist/communist economic model, why should we expect people NOT to pirate? There's no good argument considering the resource is not scarce. Physical products and digital products are not on the same level in legal and other terms and the people are voting with their behaviour.

IMHO piracy is fair reaction regardless of whether the people pirating do so for political reasons in addition to the fact that it's possible. Considering to how twisted the law and legal system has become. How the law is bought and sold by those with the most money. And the endless attempts at DRM and trying to licesense everything instead of people actually owning the stuff they buy. I consider it a counter force to the overwhelming concentration of corporate and private power at the expense of the public good and the individuals rights to own what they buy and not trying to be turned into serfs of consumption via legal corruption of the law and peoples rights.

Re:I hope P.B. win this trial (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Brave Guy (457657) | more than 5 years ago | (#26862067)

Like there's a good defense of endless copyright extension and patent trolling?

Hardly any of the content being traded over P2P and attracting the attention of Big Media is anywhere near running out of copyright, even on the original terms of just a few years. Patents have nothing to do with this at all.

I could go on, but lets face it. When has anyone fought what the majority of people want and won?

What few studies there have been that might realistically indicate the views of a whole population mostly don't support your implied position about what the majority of people support. Of course, if you get all your news on a controversial subject like this from heavily biased sources like Slashdot, you probably place a lot of weight on the one or two headline-grabbing stories about exceptions to this, and overlook everything else.

Even then, you're ignoring the fact that a lot of people don't really understand the issues surrounding copyright or the arguments for and against it. The important question if you're looking at the ethics is what the majority of people would want if fully informed. (I suspect the answer is for governments to penalise Big Media for price gouging; for smaller, independent artists to have better opportunities; and for legitimate sources of content that offer fair prices to be more easily identifiable.)

Trying to act like a resource is scarce when it is not is part of the whole problem to begin with, once made, digital works are not scarce and can always fulfill supply.

Sure, it's just those little words "once made" that you seem to be completely ignoring in your argument.

There's no good argument considering the resource is not scarce.

The good argument is that if you can't amortize the cost of making the work in the first place over a large number of sales, you go back to the old patronage model of yestercentury, where a lot of things only get made if one very rich patron chooses to fund them, and then that patron is the only person who gets to choose who can enjoy them.

IMHO piracy is fair reaction regardless of whether the people pirating do so for political reasons in addition to the fact that it's possible. Considering to how twisted the law and legal system has become. How the law is bought and sold by those with the most money. And the endless attempts at DRM and trying to licesense everything instead of people actually owning the stuff they buy. I consider it a counter force to the overwhelming concentration of corporate and private power at the expense of the public good and the individuals rights to own what they buy and not trying to be turned into serfs of consumption via legal corruption of the law and peoples rights.

So because some aspects of the legal system are not working as well as they could in some countries, and some suppliers are offering deliberately crippled products to the market, you think the correct solution is to revert to anarchy where anyone can do anything they like regardless of the law, rather than simply not using products from suppliers you don't like and letting market forces educate them? If that is the case, then I submit that you are completely lacking in perspective on the significance of this whole issue compared to the general principles of law in a civilised society. Not being able to listen to a bit of music without coughing up less than a dollar for it at an online download service is some way short of justifying civil disobedience — not that ripping music in the hope that you won't get caught is really civil disobedience anyway.

Re:I hope P.B. win this trial (1, Flamebait)

cliffski (65094) | more than 5 years ago | (#26861953)

couldn't agree more, but the average slashdotter performs amazing mental and moral backflips if it lets him leech free music and movies.

Re:I hope P.B. win this trial (1)

Maxo-Texas (864189) | more than 5 years ago | (#26861981)

If linking to illegal content is illegal then 99% of the internet is illegal.

It's all linked together man. Probably in less than 7 links too.

Re:I hope P.B. win this trial (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26862033)

I sincerely doubt that they are fully aware of the legality of any content linked from their site. The work to authenticate and determine the legal state of that much linked data require staggering amount of work, people and legal work.

Re:I hope P.B. win this trial (1)

mangu (126918) | more than 5 years ago | (#26862041)

why is there this preconception that linking to content that you know full well is illegal, is acceptable?
  i'm yet to see a good defense for this. your an accessory to a crime if you knowingly aid it.

Do you mean that if someone I meet on the street asks me where the bank is and I tell them, if then they go and rob the bank I'm an accessory?

The real question is how could someone think it could be illegal to link to anything that's on the web? It's a *web*, for chrissake, a web is *meant* to have links! If a crime was committed it was the people who put the material there who committed it, not the one who put the links pointing to the material.

Re:I hope P.B. win this trial (1)

vux984 (928602) | more than 5 years ago | (#26862055)

why is there this preconception that linking to content that you know full well is illegal, is acceptable?

Because 'speech' is not 'action', and speech has special legal protections. Child porn, hate speech, and yelling fire in a crowded theatre are against the law, but pretty much anything else goes.

A website qualifies as speech.

i'm yet to see a good defense for this. your an accessory to a crime if you knowingly aid it.

Whoah. Your getting WAY ahead of yourself here.

First, TPB doesn't 'aid' anybody. Visitors helped themselves, using software that interpreted information they had on their site. Information isn't generally of its own sake illegal.

Second, you indicate that you are an accessory to a crime if you you knowingly aid it. Which crime exactly are you referring too? Even in the states the 'making available' theory is losing ground fast. If making available isn't a crime, then linking to someone who is making it available can't be an accessory to a crime.

Third, this is Sweden, not the US. The laws in Sweden are more relaxed than the US (and 'making available' is having trouble in the US... so its hard to imagine it flying in Sweden. What crime in Sweden are you referring too, exactly, that you allege they aided?

Re:I hope P.B. win this trial (1)

migla (1099771) | more than 5 years ago | (#26862071)

Sharing, not to mention linking to, copyrighted content is acceptable in the same way that it was acceptable for Jesus to make copies of those fishes and loaves of bread. Culture, knowledge and information is food for the mind. We can distribute it virtually for free. Hallelujah!

Re:I hope P.B. win this trial (5, Insightful)

Ed Avis (5917) | more than 5 years ago | (#26862073)

1. Copyright infringement by itself is a civil wrong, not a crime. (Many jurisdictions have criminalized things like distributing pirated DVDs or bypassing access controls, but still it is not usually a crime to put a file on a server.) So you cannot be an accessory to a crime here.

2. The content of pages at a given address can change.

3. What is legal in one jurisdiction may be infringing copyright in another.

4. The site is not linking to content they 'know' is illegal. The process is fully automatic and the computer does not know what is illegal and what isn't. The people who 'know' are those who upload the links in the first place.

5. If a page linking to illegal material is itself illegal, then so is a page linking to that page, and so on. Almost the whole Web would be illegal.

6. Surely the RIAA and others send emails and make internal web pages with links to sites that infringe copyright. By your measure, this would also be illegal since it's linking.

7. Linking to a page is simply mentioning its address. If that were illegal, it would effectively be illegal to disclose the existence of certain web pages.

8. It would be an unmanageable burden for search engines, site operators and just about everybody if they had to check every link (or satisfy themselves that they do not 'know' it contains illegal material) before adding it. Better that the legal responsibility for content on a particular server is held by the owner of that server alone.

Re:I hope P.B. win this trial (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26862125)

Why exactly do you believe the content is illegal? And illegal in what jurisdiction? For example, the countries which designed their copyright laws inspired by the french tradition don't see a copyrighted work as a product but as a cultural expression, whose access must not be conditioned by the amount of money you have or don't have. That means that it is perfectly legal for anyone to access a copyrighted work without any authorization from the copyright holder.

As an example, back here it is perfectly legal for me to access any copyrighted work without any authorization (download songs/movies, photocopy a book, copy install disks, etc...) as long as a) no one is making any money out of it and b) if I distribute the works then the way I distribute them must not affect the commercial distribution in any relevant way.

So please don't make up the impression that accessing a copyrighted work is illegal everywhere. It's silly. Not all countries try to make intellectual work out to be nothing but a product.

Re:I hope P.B. win this trial (1)

julesh (229690) | more than 5 years ago | (#26862149)

why is there this preconception that linking to content that you know full well is illegal, is acceptable?

i'm yet to see a good defense for this. your an accessory to a crime if you knowingly aid it.

Because different things are illegal in different countries, and I don't know whether or not the country my site's visitor is from is legally allowed to access the content or not, so perhaps I should give them the benefit of the doubt?

Because while TPB knows that some of the content they host links to is illegal, they don't generally know which content and shouldn't be required to proactively check (which would involve them in committing further offences of actually downloading the content)?

Because telling somebody how to commit a crime (which is at the most what TPB does) is not the same as aiding them to do it?

Because copyright infringement is a civil offense, not a crime, and "accessory" laws only apply to criminal offences? Because the reason why only being an accessory to criminal offenses is an offense is a good one, i.e. that a criminal offence is one that society as a whole has an interest in discouraging while a civil one is only to protect the interests of an individual/company, and preventing assisting somebody to commit an offence is too draconian if the offence does not fall into the former category?

Re:I hope P.B. win this trial (1)

Stray7Xi (698337) | more than 5 years ago | (#26862233)

why is there this preconception that linking to content that you know full well is illegal, is acceptable?

It's not acceptable, but that doesn't make it illegal. You can't legislate people to be nice.

You're a dickhead... that's unacceptable for me to say right? Would you suggest they should make it illegal to say bad words?

Re:I hope P.B. win this trial (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26862241)

Some people believe that the whole concept of "illegal content" is deeply flawed. Some people believe that the world would be better off without copyright. Some people believe that communicating information should not ever be a crime. Some people actually believe in free speech.

The rest are just rationalizing their piracy habits. But some people out there actually want to change things.

Re:I hope P.B. win this trial (2, Interesting)

cliffski (65094) | more than 5 years ago | (#26861937)

hurrah. it will be so great when everyone can take all the media they want for free, without compensating the authors a single penny.

So great for people who enjoy content made pre 2009 anyway, Who the fuck is going to work 40 hours a week for free when they have bills to pay?

I hope all you people rooting for your Swedish heroes don't want any new content to be made after your heroes win. Unless you are going to get off your asses and make/fund it yourselves.

Re:I hope P.B. win this trial (1)

mikael_j (106439) | more than 5 years ago | (#26862059)

I need to ask, why is that every time there's a file-sharing article on /. you start going about the sky falling, horses eating horses and the downfall of western civilization? (Yes, I know I'm exaggerating, I just want to know if you know that you're also exaggerating)

/Mikael

Re:I hope P.B. win this trial (1, Insightful)

muridae (966931) | more than 5 years ago | (#26862297)

Because once people started giving away software, everyone stopped paying for the licensed versions. Didn't you hear? because of all the piracy and linux...linuxi, linuxes... out there, Microsoft had to fire everyone. IBM closed shop, took their ball and went home. Everyone just started using that old Pre-1989 software they could get for free and all the people expecting to be paid went to doing something else.

I mean, where have you been the past 20 years? Nobody pays for anything when they can get the same stuff for free!

Re:I hope P.B. win this trial (1)

spartanhelmet (1013749) | more than 5 years ago | (#26862089)

Way to have a closed mind on the issue.

Yes, there will be people who take from the system and do nothing to support it (just like shoplifting, social security fraud, etc). However there are already examples of works being provided liberally or gratis and money being made from either 'bonuses' along side paid versions or outright donations from people who enjoy the works. The "pay how much you want to" model isn't a failure, especially compared with the status quo. This is just one of the extreme examples of where IP can go.

Radiohead's last album was released for free... they didn't break up after making the amount of money they, did they?

Thanks for subscribing to the notion of copyright protecting businesses from the evil, greedy consumers. Generalising an issue based upon money isn't very deep on the thought level. Why should non-commercial private use of media be paid for?.. because of laws passed in the 1700s to provide the aristocracy a monopoly on the distribution of information? Where would we be today without the piracy of the printing press' patent?

You run a company based on IP.. I understand, since I'm moving into the games profession (though, programming) myself. Gaming is definitely a difficult case in terms of providing revenue streams with piracy lurking about, but the music and movie industries are becoming ridiculous monopolies that serve nobody but investors.

I'm not saying you should provide free gratis and make money solely from Tshirts bearing logos.. we should all think outside the box since IP controls practically everything a consumer can do. Games are a different kettle of fish, so don't take the harsh rebellion against the MPAA and RIAA (who are right pricks) to be one on the games industry too.

Re:I hope P.B. win this trial (4, Insightful)

pipatron (966506) | more than 5 years ago | (#26862139)

1) People have been pirating computer games on a large scale since the early 80ies. If you haven't been able to make a buck before, you never will.

2) No one is forcing you to make games. Please stop doing it. There are a lot of people ready do do it for free. If you only do it for the money, and your business model requires you to get paid every time someone copies your game and demand censorship of the internet because of this idea, then I think you're crazy.

Re:I hope P.B. win this trial (1)

dontmakemethink (1186169) | more than 5 years ago | (#26862017)

This means that if they are convicted it may be illegal to have links to questionable content.

Show me internet content that isn't questionable.

Re:I hope P.B. win this trial (1)

Jurily (900488) | more than 5 years ago | (#26862027)

This is far from over.

I don't think so. Unless this case is radically different from all the others [thepiratebay.org] .

Oh, and

Just some stats... ... here are some reasons why TPB is down sometimes - and how long it usually takes to fix: Tiamo gets *very* drunk and then something crashes: 4 days
Anakata gets a really bad cold and noone is around: 7 days
The US and Swedish gov. forces the police to steal our servers: 3 days .. yawn.
Posted 06-05 2006 by tpb

Anonymous Coward (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26861649)

I wonder if they do weddings too?

I'm confused. (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26861651)

Why has kdawson posted a story that is unrelated to Australia, and which contains no links to Australian websites?

This is unprecedented.

Has kdawson finally been replaced by somebody who doesn't suck dingo cocks?

Re:I'm confused. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26862119)

This is why I hate yanks you get fucked off about being over shadowed by Australians. Americas time has been and gone and now its Aussies turn so shut up you stupid fat wanker.

bad attitude (0, Troll)

X0563511 (793323) | more than 5 years ago | (#26861679)

While I agree the lawsuit(s) is(are) bullshit, this is not the attitude to take.

You don't make friends talking like this:

mdcurry: The Pirate Bay: "We reserve the right to choose freely to whom we speak. We do not speak with assholes." #spectrial

Re:bad attitude (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26861747)

If you have a spine or a soul, then yes, it is the avenue to take.

But looking at your comment history and scrolling down, you're merely another "captain obvious" trying to convince people of the evils of concepts like "having opinions" or other post-Bush nonsense. Idiot.

Yeah, because what to the Pirate Bay guys know about having an opinion? Apparently they're offended by far fewer things than you are, fag!

Re:bad attitude (0, Offtopic)

X0563511 (793323) | more than 5 years ago | (#26861753)

What the hell are you talking about?

I invite you to actually look at my comment history.

Re:bad attitude (0, Offtopic)

Maelwryth (982896) | more than 5 years ago | (#26861795)

I have taken it upon myself to independently review your comment history. It is, unfortunately, much better than mine......I hang my head in shame. :)

AWOA: Don't feed the troll.

Re:bad attitude (0, Offtopic)

Macthorpe (960048) | more than 5 years ago | (#26861949)

It's better than mine, but then mine is mostly flames carefully disguised as possible insight. I explain that away by advising people that I hate the world, which may or may not include everyone in it.

Re:bad attitude (1)

mangu (126918) | more than 5 years ago | (#26862087)

You don't make friends talking like this:

mdcurry: The Pirate Bay: "We reserve the right to choose freely to whom we speak. We do not speak with assholes." #spectrial

It just proves that they aren't karmawhores and don't mind being modded "Troll" occasionally.

The fact is the media is more or less aligned with the idea of preserving copyrights, so they won't make too many friends among the mainstream media channels, anyhow.

Re:bad attitude (1)

julesh (229690) | more than 5 years ago | (#26862179)

You don't make friends talking like this:

mdcurry: The Pirate Bay: "We reserve the right to choose freely to whom we speak. We do not speak with assholes." #spectrial

Of course the "assholes" they're talking about are media companies who have previously published stories that are biased and slanted away from them. They're unlikely to make friends with these people anyway.

If Harvard law students are defending TPB (0, Flamebait)

unassimilatible (225662) | more than 5 years ago | (#26861683)

Then they are going to be prosecuted themselves for practicing law without a license. I hope Massachusetts has a certified law student rule, or that we get a better summary.

Re:If Harvard law students are defending TPB (5, Informative)

DeadPixels (1391907) | more than 5 years ago | (#26861707)

As far as I know, the Harvard students are helping defend an individual accused of file-sharing and have nothing to do with TPB.

If I remember correctly, a semi-famous law professor is defending the individual and his students are helping him.

What the? (4, Funny)

SmallFurryCreature (593017) | more than 5 years ago | (#26861713)

Learn to read. The law students are defending Jaul Tennenbaum. NOT the piratebay. It is there in plain english. Granted that might be hard for an american to read but still.

And the law students are just assisting, in law there is an awful lot of hard work and students are the best for this provided you beat them enough. They are doing it under the guidance of their proffesor who is a qualified lawyer.

Re:What the? (3, Funny)

interkin3tic (1469267) | more than 5 years ago | (#26861735)

Learn to read. The law students are defending Jaul Tennenbaum. NOT the piratebay. It is there in plain english. Granted that might be hard for an american to read but still.

Apparently not as hard as capitalization, or spelling "Joel" correctly ;-)

Re:What the? (1)

Brian Gordon (987471) | more than 5 years ago | (#26861879)

Or proffesor

Re:What the? (1)

martin-boundary (547041) | more than 5 years ago | (#26861897)

But he's right on the money about beating students :)

Re:What the? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26862113)

Learn to read. The law students are defending Jaul Tennenbaum. NOT the piratebay. It is there in plain english. Granted that might be hard for an american to read but still.

Apparently not as hard as capitalization, or spelling "Joel" correctly ;-)

Don't make fun of his accent. They probably pronounce it "Jaul" where ever he's from. It's got to be hard translating post through Babelfish. We've got to be more tolerant and encourage people to try to speak English.

Re:If Harvard law students are defending TPB (5, Funny)

interkin3tic (1469267) | more than 5 years ago | (#26861721)

Then they are going to be prosecuted themselves for practicing law without a license.

Practicing law? No, you misunderstand, they're PHYSICALLY defending him from the RIAA. The RIAA decided legal proceedings weren't giving them the results they'd like (IE beheading people who are "stealing music" and putting those heads on a pike) so they started hiring ninjas.

Re:If Harvard law students are defending TPB (2, Funny)

KenMcM (1293074) | more than 5 years ago | (#26861751)

Hire ninjas? No. They paid some of their bad-ass artists from the ghetto a reasonable portion of their revenue.

Re:If Harvard law students are defending TPB (1)

nextekcarl (1402899) | more than 5 years ago | (#26861781)

I've heard of pirates vs ninja, and even pirates vs lawyers, but I've never heard of ninja vs lawyers.

Re:If Harvard law students are defending TPB (1)

BobisOnlyBob (1438553) | more than 5 years ago | (#26862191)

I'm used to Ninja Lawyers [google.co.uk] , actually.

Put some advertising (4, Funny)

crazybit (918023) | more than 5 years ago | (#26861687)

on all that media coverage and use that money to pay some of the lawyers fees.

Media event? (1, Interesting)

clarkkent09 (1104833) | more than 5 years ago | (#26861703)

You mean they are trying to court the same media companies whose content is being shared through Pirate Bay and who are behind the efforts to shut it down in the first place? Nice to see they have good weed in Sweden. If the trial does become a media spectacle (though I haven't seen it even mentioned in any mainstream news outlets in the US, maybe it's different in Europe) I doubt it will be the kind of coverage that is sympathetic to TPB.

Re:Media event? (3, Informative)

crazybit (918023) | more than 5 years ago | (#26861715)

most of the coverage will be using internet services, traditional media can't compete with this.

Re:Media event? (1)

clarkkent09 (1104833) | more than 5 years ago | (#26861737)

Ah, you mean the bus tour. I see.... well, that truly is a media spectacle worthy of the name. For those millions of you glued to your screens waiting for the latest news, yet unable to see the current location due to slashdoting within seconds of posting the article, here is the most recent update: The Bus has left Belgrade. Coming soon: arriving in some other city later on today. Fucking morons.

Re:Media event? (1)

Elektroschock (659467) | more than 5 years ago | (#26861833)

How great that the Robin Hoods of the copyright industry are stealing back [openrightsgroup.org] . Schweden is part of the European Union. And someone sent me per mail this invitation here to an open conference in the European Parliament, feel free to join and/or spread:

Who wants to control the internet ?

The Greens in the European Parliament have the pleasure to invite you to a conference on internet policy concerning the Telecom package and the Medina report.

The European Parliament is about to take very important decisions that will affect the every day use of the internet by europeans : the telecom package will be adopted in second reading in April, and the Medina report on copyright recommends a very restrictive vision of the web. What is at stake is no less than net neutrality : will MEPs allow discrimination on the internet ?

Net neutrality means that the network should be neutral and can be only be managed for technical or security reasons. Some companies dream of being able to manipulate access in order to restrict or give preference to certain services and websites, so as to block access to their competitor's services. They want to use net management as a tool against competition. This debate will have a global impact since the new US administration is expected to take crucial decisions on this issue over the next year.

This hearing aims at revealing what is really at stake behind the complexity of several European Directives up for consideration by the European Parliament in the coming weeks.

Please join us for this important and informative conference.

Rebecca Harms, Helga Trüppel, Eva Lichtenberger, David Hammerstein

Members of the Parliament 's Green/Efa Group

Draft Programme

Who wants to control the internet ?
A conference organized by the Greens/Efa in the European Parliament to look into how the Medina report and the Telecom package can affect the internet

18 February 2009
16.30-18.30 Room 1G2
Interpretation : EN-FR-DE-Nl

Academic speaker
Dr.Monica Horten, Communications and Media Research Institute, University of Westminster (Website: http://www.iptegrity.com/ [iptegrity.com] )

Free Software
Alix Cazenave, APRIL (Associaton for the promotion of Libre Software)

Industry speakers
Angelique Broux, IBM
You Tube
Benjamin Bayard, French Data Network (French internet provider)

Civil Society & Consumers
Charles Simon, ISSOC (The Internet Society is an independent international nonprofit organisation which provides leadership in Internet related standards, education, and policy)
Anne-Catherine Lorrain, TACD
Graham Taylor, Open Forum Europe
Jérémie Zimmermann, La Quadrature du Net

Registration is free but mandatory as to be allowed access to the European Parliament
Please send you full name, birthdate and address to Laurence.vandewalle@europarl.europa.eu

Why? (2, Insightful)

GF678 (1453005) | more than 5 years ago | (#26861733)

Why are they doing this?

(a) They are very confident of being acquitted, so they want to obtain as much media attention as possible to support their cause (in this case the cause not being to get them acquitted, but rather what they're fighting for)

or

(b) They are trying to get media attention to save their own skins

I doubt this "spectrial" business is to obtain martyrdom. In their current situation, with jail time being a possibility, I doubt their principles of free movies for example would really be worth fighting for.

If I was in their position, I would do whatever it took to be acquitted. They run the risk of pissing the court off with this show, so I don't think it can help. We only have one life after all - it's not worth fighting for pirated content!

Re:Why? (4, Insightful)

Ieshan (409693) | more than 5 years ago | (#26861851)

If I was in their position, I would do whatever it took to be acquitted.

Would you? Suppose you were the guy who runs the Pirate Bay: Your entire identity and celebrity rests on the fact that this website is still accessible. Do certain things and you are forever known as a sell-out, especially after the ridiculous amount of media attention you have heaped on yourself (even in the days before they started being idiots about the trial).

I think there are certain things you wouldn't sacrifice. I think there are social contracts you would choose not to violate.

Do I think these guys really believe in the freedom of information, in the freedom of speech, in the "free format" garbage that gets spewed all over this and other websites? No, of course not. But, their followers certainly do, and that's all that matters here.

I think this is just one side of the cost-benefit analysis. Risk jail time and large fines, but gain media attention and more devout fans.

I don't think these guys are any more brave or principled or high-minded than the guy who goes to jail for his gang rather than snitch on the leader. You'd think that selfish, personal greed would take over, but at some point, you can't sacrifice your identity.

Re:Why? (1)

JackieBrown (987087) | more than 5 years ago | (#26861913)

Exactly

How many people remember the guy from lokitorrents?

And for those that do, most see a pathetic sellout

Re:Why? (1)

GF678 (1453005) | more than 5 years ago | (#26862007)

Yes, these guys do have their identity attached to TPB, and their followers certainly wouldn't want to see them sell out to avoid punishment.

But then again, their followers aren't the ones with jail time on the line. The folks who run TPB have to decide whether they care more about their own lives, or their fanbase. The consequences are different for both sides.

Besides, they could just do something else. They seem like a smart bunch, technically at least. Plus of course, jail time is apparently quite unlikely in this case, so I hear. Perhaps I'm just thinking of this too seriously. :)

Re:Why? (1)

spartanhelmet (1013749) | more than 5 years ago | (#26862133)

'Fanbase' has connotations I think are a bit misleading. They're not doing it for the groupies, to get famous or even for money. They're known for running TPB, sure, but it's not to get an identity fanbase.

These fellows don't live off ads on TPB.. they *are* a smart bunch which is why they operate a webhosting company Sweden. They're legit in terms of how they make money (ie, not from the tracker ads), but controversial for believing in IP reform.

I for one, welcome our monopoly restructuring overlords.

Re:Why? (3, Interesting)

Peaker (72084) | more than 5 years ago | (#26862037)

Do you really find it that hard to believe that the guys behind TPB don't believe in copyright restrictions on private individuals?

I think it is very easy to believe that copyrights should not restrict individuals, in fact, I am doing so right now.

Re:Why? (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26861865)

They risk at most two years in prison. That is one year in practice - at *maximum*. The investigation since the raid has been longer than that (Since summer of 2006) ! :)

And this is not one year of "pound-me-in-the-ass" american prison. This is Swedish resort-prison. In a Swedish prison you live in a nice room, you have have some normal furnitures, you can have a game console, like PS3, and access to a computer. You can study university courses, if you work you get paid, write some books or whatever for a year. Take a break from life.

Then when jailtime is over they will be famous martyrs. Heroes of the internets. Perhaps have some place in the history books no matter if copyright laws are changed or not. (and also a couple of hundred of millions of USDs in foreign accounts, according to rumors) :)

Best way to act now for them is just continue to push for what they believe in, make a "spectrial" out of it - become as famous as possible, milk it as much as they can. Then reap the rewards. All publicity is good publicity as they say! :)

And they will NEVER EVER have a hard time finding jobs or making money.

Pirates that hide cowardly and are ashamed of what they have done. They loose, because they act like loosers...

Re:Why? (4, Interesting)

dotancohen (1015143) | more than 5 years ago | (#26861995)

If I was in their position, I would do whatever it took to be acquitted. They run the risk of pissing the court off with this show, so I don't think it can help. We only have one life after all - it's not worth fighting for pirated content!

While I think that TPB operators are wrong in linking to illegal content, I do no see this trial as a trial of their wrongdoing. I see this trial as a trial of Sweden's sovereignty. These people did nothing illegal _in_Sweden_. Why should the the Swedes sacrifice their sovereignty, to appease American businessmen?

Re:Why? (5, Insightful)

uffe_nordholm (1187961) | more than 5 years ago | (#26862039)

Unfortunately, I agree with you: this trial is more about international politics than whether or not the guys have actually done something illegal.

Just the fact that there will _be_ a trial is slightly bizarre, since the prosecutor had, just a few months before the police raid, written an official document where he claims TPB are doing nothing wrong.

Enter then the minister of Justice, who had been on a trip to the USA, to meet his counterpart there. When the minister was back home it didn't take long for the police to raid TPB and seize everything in sight (including many servers belonging to other companies and totally unrelated to TPB).

To the general public, it looks very much like TPB got raided as a result of the minister of Justice applying pressure on the prosecutor to get something done. If this is really what happened, someone is likely to find himself in trouble, since it is against the constitution for the government to decide what the authorities should do in specific cases.

Re:Why? (1)

Anonymous Brave Guy (457657) | more than 5 years ago | (#26862095)

I see this trial as a trial of Sweden's sovereignty.

<Devil's advocate>

Sweden is a signatory to major international copyright agreements such as TRIPS.

If they have chosen not to implement the required protections in their own national law, while availaing themselves of the protection of others under these agreements, then they are untrustworthy and deceitful.

This is a trial of Sweden's willingness to meet its obligations under agreements it signed up to more than a decade ago and whose benefits its own citizens have enjoyed ever since.

</Devil's advocate>

Re:Why? (1)

91degrees (207121) | more than 5 years ago | (#26862279)

These people did nothing illegal _in_Sweden_.

[citation needed]. I really want to know how everyone is so much more knowledgable than legally trained Swedish prosecutors about the intricacies of Swedish copyright law. I find it hard to believe they would have brought this case if they didn't think they could make a case.

They're doing more than "providing links". They're providing a mechanism whereby people can download infringing content and providing it for the primary purpose of aiding people in downloading infringing content.

"Spectrial" business? So who is running this show? (1)

D4C5CE (578304) | more than 5 years ago | (#26861999)

Why are they doing this?

They are not doing this, the ones who had them searched, seized and accused (apparently in an attempt at rather sweeping application of the respective statutes) do, and with an axe to grind have brought this spectrial upon everyone involved in the first place.
It is in the public interest (of the people in whose name the judgement is to be rendered) that criminal proceedings be as public as possible. What greater favour could the accused do to this cause than to help educate potential perpetrators about the legal limits, by organising the broadcast of what might become their own conviction (or acquittal, for that matter - in which case it is every bit as important for everyone to know which of their freedoms have not been restrained by ambiguous rules).

TPB was rumoured to be a tracker (automagically compiled index), not a host to infringing material last time I checked.

Just ponder for a moment on what it might also mean for references and hyperlinks set by everyone else in the country (including search engines of all sorts) if they were convicted...

Greeeeat (1, Insightful)

MWoody (222806) | more than 5 years ago | (#26861743)

Wow, thanks guys. I was rooting for you there for a while, just out of a sense of "hurray for the little guy." Way to make me remember that however theoretically just your cause, you're a bunch of random assholes profiting off the work of others!

The ongoing struggle to procure intelligent, reasonable intellectual property and fair use rights worldwide needs these guys as spokespeople like animal rights needs PETA and parents' groups need Jack Thompson. Like so many before them drunk on the heady mix of righteousness and attention, they've gone full tilt into being walking, talking straw men.

Go get them TPB (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26861803)

YARRR.

Don't take sides. (1)

Snufu (1049644) | more than 5 years ago | (#26861807)

Neither party in this affair deserves approbation.

hope they get conficted.. (2, Funny)

timmarhy (659436) | more than 5 years ago | (#26861919)

.. for making up such a stupid word as "spectrial". doesn't the web have enough retarded pretend words?

Re:hope they get conficted.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26861951)

doesn't the web have enough retarded pretend words?

You mean like "conficted"? Or do you mean more like gratuitously misusing words, like e.g. "retarded"? By the way, do you have any strong views on capitalisation? I only ask as you are someone whose views on the topic of language are clearly worth listening to.

Re:hope they get conficted.. (1)

timmarhy (659436) | more than 5 years ago | (#26862093)

unlike TPB guys, i only do that shit by accident.

Re:hope they get conficted.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26862109)

maybe you need to review your own grammar before pointing out others mistakes, "like e.g. " is a misuse in itself.

Re:hope they get conficted.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26862239)

maybe you need to review your own grammar before pointing out others mistakes, "like e.g. " is a misuse in itself.

Awww, did I omit a redundant comma? Maybe you should try using them less often yourself.

I don't care about anyone's grammar but my own. My point was this: someone who complains about language but doesn't give a rat's arse about getting it right is a time-waster and not worth anyone's attention.

BTW, I take it from your inability to use a shift key that you are none other than timmarhy. I don't have an account, and have no intention of creating one; while you --? You are not only a time-waster but a coward, and you have my attention no longer.

Re:hope they get conficted.. (1)

julesh (229690) | more than 5 years ago | (#26862163)

doesn't the web have enough retarded pretend words?

No! We should encourage them! We should set up a web site listing them. We can call them retardologisms.

The future of file-sharing (2, Interesting)

castrox (630511) | more than 5 years ago | (#26862057)

The future of file-sharing will be just like the old days, only better!

While it's nice with torrent sites and all, it enables anyone to see who's downloading and uploading what on a single torrent. This clearly is the approach copyright holders are going to take in Sweden.

Now, I agree that the artists should be able to make money. Just not these silly amounts they dream of! The cost of creative works is declining every day with the availability of the heaps of content already available from many decades and even centuries. "New" is a thing fewer and fewer appreciate when faced with all this other older, great, music.

In the older days, we could not lay our hands on that content. Come Internet, the market completely changed. (Thinking of the "Long tail"-concept. Amazon: http://www.amazon.com/Long-Tail-Revised-Updated-Business/dp/1401309666/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1234693596&sr=8-1 [amazon.com] )

Hey, we've got at least 16 gigabytes of USB thumb drives! It will be just like passing dope in the hallways. It's insane, the amounts of data easily transferable from friend to friend. Kill Internet file-sharing and see the music market stagnate because no one is buying shit they didn't even hear about. New single-album-artists will take decades to market!

Meanwhile, real artists with real skill will sell as they always has been. They won't be making millions off records or digital copies, but will have to lift their asses to go touring and give the consumers something they are willing to pay for.

Bye bye Karma

Well written primer for upcoming Pirate Bay trial (2, Informative)

VinylRecords (1292374) | more than 5 years ago | (#26862091)

http://www.salon.com/tech/giga_om/online_video/2009/02/15/the_definitive_primer_to_the_pirate_bay_trial/index.html?source=rss&aim=/tech/giga_om/online_video [salon.com]
Janko Roettgers for Salon.com wrote an excellent summary of previous events and a preview of what to expect regarding the trial of the Pirate Bay. Should bring anyone up to speed on the trial.

Re:Well written primer for upcoming Pirate Bay tri (1)

astralpancakes (1164701) | more than 5 years ago | (#26862269)

That's pretty good, though it should probably be pointed out that this case will go through all three levels of the Swedish courts, and it's likely to take years for the final decision to come about.
A guilty verdict would require proof of intent, which isn't impossible. The amounts they are suing for are likely irrelevant, however, as Swedish law only allows to sue for actual damages. The lawsuit lists specific albums, movies, games and so on, and it's unlikely (to say the least) that the prosecution will be able to produce proof that their losses from those add up to the amount they're suing for.

Anyone interested in Swedish law as relating to this case should check out this, btw: the former Swedish minister of justice [wikipedia.org] is believed to have ordered the raid on TPB under pressure from the US/media industry. This would be, under Swedish law, highly unconstitutional [wikipedia.org] .

The problem with piracy? (1)

jamesmcm (1354379) | more than 5 years ago | (#26862129)

I don't see the problem with piracy to be honest. Any commodity that can be copied freely is (monetarily) worthless. They just need to realize there is going to be no money in album sales, etc. and this might mean that there are less bands, movies, etc. but I think that is better than a future of heavy DRM [gnu.org] and giving Free money to the **AA (see blank media taxes).

Denmark Blocks Pirate Bay (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26862131)

Ãstre Landsret har ved kendelse af 26. november 2008 stadfæstet fogedrettens kendelse af 29. januar 2008, hvorefter Sonofon A/S er blevet pÃ¥lagt at hindre sine kunders adgang til www.thepiratebay.org.

PÃ¥ baggrund af kendelsen fra Ãstre Landsret har TDC besluttet at spærre for adgangen til siden.

TDC har ikke foretaget nogen registrering af dit besÃg pÃ¥ denne side.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...