×

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!

Pirate Bay P2P Trial Begins In Sweden

ScuttleMonkey posted more than 5 years ago | from the google-doesn't-index-anything-illegal-either dept.

The Courts 723

Many readers are writing to tell us that The Pirate Bay trial is now in full swing in Sweden. Looking at a possible two years in prison and $150,000 in fines (plus another $14.3 million if the record companies get their way), the battle of infringement is sure to be one of the most watched p2p trials. "The International Federation of Phonographic Industry (IFPI) which is representing the case of music and film producers, made a statement about the case on Friday. Stating, For people who make a living out of creativity or in a creative business, there is scarcely anything more important than to have your rights protected by the law. Copyright exists to ensure that everyone in the creative world from the artist to the record label, from the independent film producer to the TV program maker - can choose how their creations are distributed and get fairly rewarded for their work. The operators of The Pirate Bay have violated those rights and, as the evidence in Court will show, they did so to make substantial revenues for themselves. That kind of abuse of the rights of others cannot be allowed to continue, and that is why these criminal proceedings are so important for the health of the creative community."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

723 comments

A Strawman for the Symptom (5, Insightful)

eldavojohn (898314) | more than 5 years ago | (#26876225)

I'm saddened by this not because I think the Pirate Bay operators are innocent but because I feel they're an easy target to set precedence on.

Meanwhile, the real issues at hand continue to get worse and go unaddressed. Like the fact that the EU just extended music copyright to 95 years [timesonline.co.uk] (maybe in an effort to catch up with the United States?). Or the fact that people who collect digital music en masse couldn't possibly have bought it all in the first place. Or the important differences between illegal digital distribution and traditional theft of goods or money.

No, unfortunately, the IFPI/RIAA isn't going to figure out a way to cope with new awe-inducing technologies. The court system isn't going to earn any respect from its citizens. Musicians aren't going to be rewarded anymore than they already are. The free market will suffer from DRM. And people who depended on seeds and traffic for legal reasons from these sites are going to be left shit outta luck.

I feel like we're stuck with a bunch of dinosaurs concerned only with their self preservation when the fact is that they leach so much money from the system that they simply can no longer be a part of it. Songs cost $1 to download when they should cost 11 cents with ten cents going to the artist and one cent going to the host/distributor.

This trial isn't a solution and we all know how it's going to end. Work out solutions that really plague the system and piracy will go away.

Re:A Strawman for the Symptom (0, Flamebait)

Ieshan (409693) | more than 5 years ago | (#26876349)

Meanwhile, the real issues at hand continue to get worse and go unaddressed. Like the fact that the EU just extended music copyright to 95 years [timesonline.co.uk] (maybe in an effort to catch up with the United States?). Or the fact that people who collect digital music en masse couldn't possibly have bought it all in the first place. Or the important differences between illegal digital distribution and traditional theft of goods or money.

Unfortunately, while all of these are real and relevant issues, the people pirating on the pirate bay, in large majority, just don't care about any of them.

If Copyright were only 1 year, do you really think that people wouldn't still be pirating films by aXXo the day of DVD release?

The Pirate Bay is about theft, plain and simple. It may be true that the monetary losses are not nearly what the record companies claim, and it may be true that the media conglomerates are really out for money for themselves rather than to support the starving artists, but the propaganda is propaganda on both sides.

People pirate movies because they want to watch movies without paying for them. If you're one of the unique snowflakes that pirates movies because you bought every DVD on earth and just want a nicer and non-DRM format, that's cute. But you are not the majority. The majority are thieves.

I think once BOTH the *IAAs and the pirates have a little bit of self-realization is when some real work can be done on copyright. But the pirates are every bit as self delusional as the record labels right now.

Re:A Strawman for the Symptom (5, Insightful)

K.os023 (1093385) | more than 5 years ago | (#26876519)

The Pirate Bay is about theft, plain and simple. [...] but the propaganda is propaganda on both sides.

It would appear that one side's propaganda is working. There is no theft in piracy. Unauthorized copying, yes, but no theft. This has been explained countless times here. I find it saddening that even here on slashdot, we hear people who bought the "theft" propagands from the *IAAs.

Goddamn INFRINGERS !! (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26876813)

If it's anything I can't stand, it's those goddamn infringers !! I see them every FUCKING day !! Let's all find these infringers and send them off to the porky park gulash !!

Re:A Strawman for the Symptom (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26877009)

And the other side's propaganda is quite healthy, too, apparently. How far do you really think technicalities are going to get you? "Theft", "unauthorized copying", "infringing", etc, etc. You honestly think the entire court system hinges on dotting every i and crossing every t and that's a foolproof way to get away with anything? Get one lawyer in there to form a feasible link between "theft" and "unauthorized copying", and a precedent is set. Get one lawyer in there who fulfills every technicality fantasy you can think of, and a precedent is set.

You can throw around all the "No, it's not A, it's CAALLLLLLLLLLED B!" you want, it's still wrong.

Re:A Strawman for the Symptom (5, Informative)

skrolle2 (844387) | more than 5 years ago | (#26876547)

The Pirate Bay is about theft, plain and simple. It may be true that the monetary losses are not nearly what the record companies claim, and it may be true that the media conglomerates are really out for money for themselves rather than to support the starving artists, but the propaganda is propaganda on both sides.

No it is not, it's about copyright infringement. Calling it theft is part of the propaganda of one of the sides in the debate, and it's rather ironic that you argue against it in the same sentence.

Also, I think you are wrong in your assumption of why people pirate movies, it's not because it's free, it's because it's convenient.

Re:A Strawman for the Symptom (5, Insightful)

rudeboy1 (516023) | more than 5 years ago | (#26876671)

I couldn't agree more. The last 3 movies I've seen in a theater were without exception ruined by either other movie-goers, or another factor like idiotic theater staff or sticky floors. I LOVE movies, but I'm almost to the point of swearing off going to the cinema.

I might or might not pirate movies from time to time, but if I did, the vast majority of them would be movies I've seen before, usually in the theater. While I wouldn't be paying for these hypothetical movies, it is a matter of convenient acquisition of movies, so that I can access them anytime I want and watch them at my convenience.

I DO pay for a Netflix subscription. Which, when combined with my XBox, allows me to access a lot of movies at almost the same convenience factor of the ones sitting on my hard drive. This is an example of turning someone who might or might not have pilfered the occasional torrented movie into someone paying a fair price for a fair shake. Netflix does include a measure of DRM, essentially making it impossible (that I am aware of) to copy the streamed moves to disc- or if you can, it would equate to copying a song off the radio-post stream and all that. However, Netflix applies this DRM without making me feel like a criminal for trying to access my content in a normal manner.

This is the ONLY example of a major media outlet actually taking advantage of new technologies to expand their offerings. But I think that has a large part to do with the fact that Netflix IS the new technology. I'm sure Blockbuster would love to claim the part of the victim of new technology of they had a foot to stand on. From what I hear, they are circling the drain these days as a direct result of Netflix' market share.

Re:A Strawman for the Symptom (4, Interesting)

EvilIdler (21087) | more than 5 years ago | (#26876897)

I know pirates. They don't do it only because it's convenient. For example, one network-tech I know bought an Xbox 360, and he modded it the moment he got it. He's making fat cash, yet he doesn't want to pay for a single fucking game. Meanwhile, I have bought every game for my 360 (a lot of arcade titles), and I don't even have time to play the ones I could afford. That's no small pile, mind you.

Another person I know isn't much into games, but can he scrounge up cash for a less-than-$100 invoice program? No fucking way! It's not about convenience. Some people just don't think software is worth paying for, and movies likewise.

P-bay and the like are nice for sampling the entertainment out there, and it's the only option for people outside the US. The nice online viewing services are entirely US-centric (or UK-centric, for the BBC's iPlayer). Getting international ad-revenue shouldn't be hard, as I've been seeing an explosion of Google text-ads for local products/services in the past year. Somebody must have the tech to know where I visit from!

Re:A Strawman for the Symptom (1)

Hybrid-brain (1478551) | more than 5 years ago | (#26876943)

The Pirate Bay is about theft, plain and simple. It may be true that the monetary losses are not nearly what the record companies claim, and it may be true that the media conglomerates are really out for money for themselves rather than to support the starving artists, but the propaganda is propaganda on both sides.

No it is not, it's about copyright infringement. Calling it theft is part of the propaganda of one of the sides in the debate, and it's rather ironic that you argue against it in the same sentence.

Also, I think you are wrong in your assumption of why people pirate movies, it's not because it's free, it's because it's convenient.

Yes. It is convenient. When you're making maybe less then 10 grand per year and you can't afford to go see a movie on a weekly basis, or go out and buy that game you want, or that program for your computer, then it is justifiable to use sites like Pirate Bay and other BitTorrent sites. Yes, though I realize that sometimes The System would rather screw you over and care less about your issues, because they are the people with money. But at the same time, the people making all the money, all the big wigs at the top, they should be more considerate of the "little man," but in cases like what is going on with Pirate Bay, it should be left to the discretion of those in charge, yet though with fair warning, that one day the little person will prevail.

Re:A Strawman for the Symptom (4, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26876949)

You are both wrong actually. It's not even about copyright infringement, it's about contributory infringement which in this case basically it means they are being accused of giving out the address of a location where copyright material may or may not be located.

Reference: http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2009/02/pirate.html

Quote: The men behind of the notorious BitTorrent tracking service known for pointing the way to pirated software, games, music and movies are accused of contributory copyright infringement

Lesson to be learned: don't give out IP address+port pair information!

Re:A Strawman for the Symptom (5, Insightful)

Hordeking (1237940) | more than 5 years ago | (#26876957)

Don't forget, it's the only way to get a lot of foreign films, or out of print stuff that the studios simply aren't releasing. Want to watch The Phantom Hourglass or the new Outer Limits programs? Good luck finding them on DVD. You have to resort to p2p for TV/VHS rips.

Re:A Strawman for the Symptom (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26876579)

theif, theif, theif...

This is the lie I hear more than all others. It's COPYING not STEALING.

Re:A Strawman for the Symptom (0, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26876893)

Semantics. 110% Bullshit.

You get it for free when you know full well you ought to be paying for it. Theft is as good a term as we've got so far. "copyright infringement" = "getting it for free" = "theft".

English doesn't have a specific word for it (yet) but when it does, it will be a synonym for theft. It'll mean "digital copying without paying and without leaving the previous owner empty handed", but colloquially it will still be theft.

Grow up and stop trying to justify what you're doing with bullshit semantic arguments. Take responsibility for your actions because you should already know that you are stealing something.

That being said, I do it too. I'm just not completely delusional like so many of you jackasses.

I STEAL MUSIC, MOVIES and SOFTWARE DIGITALLY. I DON'T PAY, I DON'T DESERVE THEM, I DON'T EVEN OWN AN ORIGINAL COPY. I AM HONEST WITH MYSELF WHEN I TELL MYSELF THAT I AM STEALING THESE THINGS, BECAUSE I HAVE NO RIGHT TO OWN THEM WITHOUT BUYING THEM.

Re:A Strawman for the Symptom (4, Insightful)

BlueStrat (756137) | more than 5 years ago | (#26876585)

If Copyright were only 1 year, do you really think that people wouldn't still be pirating films by aXXo the day of DVD release?

If copyright was only 1 year or even just the original period before extensions, AND prices actually reflected the market while DRM and similar value-robbing things were done away with, then I'd argue the Pirate Bay and the other examples of questionably-legal distribution wouldn't exist in any meaningful way.

People are lazy. If they could buy an unencumbered product at what are perceived to be low & fair prices, they wouldn't bother to pirate and there would be no Pirate Bay or its' ilk.

Massive piracy and disregard for copyright laws happens because consumers find it the only avenue to get the product they want, at non-extortionate prices, and in unencumbered formats that don't hinder their enjoyment and fair use. Remove these obstacles and piracy would go back to meaning something that occurs at sea.

Cheers!

Strat

Re:A Strawman for the Symptom (4, Interesting)

BlowHole666 (1152399) | more than 5 years ago | (#26876851)

If they could buy an unencumbered product at what are perceived to be low & fair prices, they wouldn't bother to pirate and there would be no Pirate Bay or its' ilk.

Massive piracy and disregard for copyright laws happens because consumers find it the only avenue to get the product they want, at non-extortionate prices, and in unencumbered formats that don't hinder their enjoyment and fair use. Remove these obstacles and piracy would go back to meaning something that occurs at sea.

I could not agree more. For example I went to go see a movie at the theater this weekend. It come my wife and I $9.25 a ticket. So why would I want to pay $18.50 to go see a movie. When I can wait 6 months for it to come out on netflix or wait for it to come to the $1 theater. The media companies fail to realize that their customers are starting to realize that they are simply getting ripped off. Now everyone has a limits of what they consider "ripped off". For example I do not feel like I am getting ripped off when I pay $15 a month for netflix. Some people do feel that way. I think the media companies need to figured out a happy medium to reduce their losses and then prosecute the rest. For example lowering the price of a song to say $.75 and then suing people who distribute.

Re:A Strawman for the Symptom (5, Interesting)

Yvan256 (722131) | more than 5 years ago | (#26876625)

The Pirate Bay is also a source to bypass the industry, which sometimes works against itself.

As an example, I have bought "Colossus: The Forbin Project" on VHS tape years ago. It's in widescreen.

Now, Universal, the owners of that title, butchered the North American DVD release by making it a 4:3 pan and scan title. They have no respect for their own property. There was some backlash on a lot of forums, and the UK release was made widescreen (not sure it's because of the backlash, but who knows). I've heard that they even butchered the interlacing on the UK DVD, to make things even worst.

So here's the problems:
1. If we go by the MPAA's terms of "buying a viewing license" for movies, I already paid my license for this movie when I bought the VHS tape.
2. Even if I was willing to pay the license AGAIN for the DVD, they botched the North American release DVD (4:3 instead of widescreen)
3. Even if I was willing to import the UK DVD, it wouldn't play in my DVD player
4. The only possible way to get a good digital copy of that movie would be to import the UK version and fix the interlacing problem while ripping it. But in some countries, ripping the DVD is also illegal, even though you bought the damn thing.

So, legally, the only good commercial version available for that movie still seems to be the LaserDisc. And we're In 2009. If that's not a good example of the industry being a slow dinosaur that can't even take care of its own products, I don't know what is.

Re:A Strawman for the Symptom (3, Insightful)

an.echte.trilingue (1063180) | more than 5 years ago | (#26876629)

The Pirate Bay is about theft, plain and simple.

Dude, are you trolling? Why can we not discuss this issue without some idiot like you hijacking the thread? Look, copyright infringment is not theft. You can argue the im/morality of copyright infringement all you want, and I and many others might agree with you if you argue that it is wrong and can support the statement.

However, copyright infringement and theft are not the same fucking thing already. Jesus.

Re:A Strawman for the Symptom (5, Interesting)

ObsessiveMathsFreak (773371) | more than 5 years ago | (#26876639)

The Pirate Bay is about theft, plain and simple.

I had a calculator once. It was a nice little Sharp model. It had a button for pi, and could even do numerical integration. I was pretty happy with it. One day, it was stolen. This theft left me calculatorless for some time. It was somewhat of a blow.

However, if instead, someone had looked at my calculator, taken out a 3D tricorder-mapper-duplicator-thingamabob and had made an exact copy of my calculator, complete with all functionality, and left me with mine, I don't think I would have been quite as upset. In fact, I think you will agree that if I ran around waving my calculator in the air claiming that it had been robbed from me and that I was a victim of "theft", I would not get a lot of sympathy. Indeed, some might even say my terminology was not entirely correct. If all this happenned, I would still have my calculator, which after following the actual theft I most certainly do not.

Copyright Infringement is not theft. Nor is it stealing. It is Copyright Infringement. Thank you for your attention, and for your sympathy in the case of my missing digital companion.

Re:A Strawman for the Symptom (4, Interesting)

anagama (611277) | more than 5 years ago | (#26876891)

Your analogy fails. What if you had invested a huge amount of money and time hiring people to program and build the machine?

The standard line about "sharing/theft" from the p2p crowd fails to consider that the person doing the sharing is not the creator, merely a user. For a user, there is no loss with a digital copy. For a creator, who depends on the creation for income, there is a loss of potential income. At which point we get to the "I would never have paid for that junk anyway" argument, to which the obvious response is "if it has no value to you, you won't mind not having it."

Re:A Strawman for the Symptom (1)

ObsessiveMathsFreak (773371) | more than 5 years ago | (#26876979)

Your analogy fails. What if you had invested a huge amount of money and time hiring people to program and build the machine?

As I recall, I invested quite a bit of money in that calculator, and quite a bit of time learning its functionality. True, I didn't incorporate a company and hire people to do all this, but I don't see how that breaks the analogy above on how copyright infringement is not the same thing as theft.

For a user, there is no loss with a digital copy. For a creator, who depends on the creation for income, there is a loss of potential income.

Exactly. Nobody has lost anything of material value. Copyright infringement is not theft. Copyright infringement is just copyright infringement.

Re:A Strawman for the Symptom (1)

CannonballHead (842625) | more than 5 years ago | (#26876923)

Hmmm. I don't really think this entirely hits the nail on the head. (cliches are great)

We're not talking about stealing physical property so much as stealing revenue. Granted, I'm not a fan of *IAA groups. But copyright infringement, IMO, can be theft/stealing. Let's say I offer my album on Magnatune. Let's say it ends up on TPB. Now let's say people download it on TPB and not Magnatune. That is a loss of revenue for me, correct? So, the question for ME, the artist, in that situation, is what is loss of revenue: theft or copyright infringement?

I realize that the current situation is slightly different because of *IAA groups and all that, but saying that not paying for something and taking it anyway is NOT theft seems to be trying to call something less than what it is. Just because something is not taking the availability away from you does not mean it is not theft. Your example of a calculator is not correct; it would not have been theft from you, it wouldn't have been anything from you. We're not talking about theft from LISTENERS, we're talking about theft from artists or whatever. Or, I guess, theft from *IAA revenue.

Again. I am not advocating *IAA actions, I'm arguing that saying that illegally downloaded music, pirated music, pirated films, pirated books, WHATEVER the electronic medium is that is being pirated ... saying that that is ONLY copyright infringement is minimizing the problem. Copyright infringement, as I understand it, has to do with taking something and claiming it is yours (e.g., you take my sheet music, put your name on it, and sell it as yours). If you take my sheet music without my permission/without paying for it, that's theft. Even if it's a digital copy.

Re:A Strawman for the Symptom (5, Insightful)

rzei (622725) | more than 5 years ago | (#26876717)

I do not think TPB is about theft.. Or at least that's not what made it so popular, here's the real deal:

  1. People, in this case, young people who know how to use the Internet got a thought they want to watch the same movies/tv-shows premiering in the USA allaround the world
  2. People search for a legal alternative, which in this case was and still is: wait. There's a chance you can in next N months:
    • Go watch the movie in theaters, if movie is a blockbuster (N < 12)
    • Go rent the movie, if movie is a blockbuster (Ntheater + [1, 6])
    • Hope that your local TV-channel airs the show (N > 12)
    • Hope that you can one day buy the show on your region DVD (N > 18), region 1 (N > 24)*

With this new cool Internet, where news about everything travels at lightspeed, and stuff gets old faster than yesterdays newspaper, people want to see their films now, not in 12 months.

* It's not legal to watch Region 1 DVD's where I live, as I live in Europe. Alas, not even watching DVD's under linux is legal here anymore.

I at least, have contacted for example Fox, on how to view some of their series legally from here, but they didn't even bother. That sends a clear message to me that it's ok to download 24 from bittorrent, hell they do not even want my money, I doubt they are going to sue me if they do not want to make a deal in the first place.

Re:A Strawman for the Symptom (2, Interesting)

SanityInAnarchy (655584) | more than 5 years ago | (#26876795)

the people pirating on the pirate bay, in large majority, just don't care about any of them.

I would guess that there is also a large majority of them who might not have started using the Pirate Bay if some of these larger issues had been addressed.

If Copyright were only 1 year, do you really think that people wouldn't still be pirating films by aXXo the day of DVD release?

Perhaps not. But I think if movies cost 50 cents or a dollar to download, were released simultaneously in all regions, and were available in an un-DRM'd format, far more people would buy them than pirate them. Especially if you then streamline the process, and provide added value that doesn't exist in the pirated version.

The Pirate Bay is about theft, plain and simple.

Clearly, you've ignored one of the GP's "real and relevant issues" -- The Pirate Bay is not about theft. If anything, it is about copyright infringement. Moreover, it is about free culture, through legal or illegal means -- I can cite at least one probably legal documentary (Good Copy Bad Copy) which has been released via The Pirate Bay. It has also been used for leaks -- in fact, go to ThePirateBay homepage, click on the banner, and find all kinds of leaked information about Scientology.

What's more, as long as you think the way you are thinking, you are simply not equipped to fight piracy. Regardless of the trial in Sweden, piracy will continue, and it will only get worse. The only way to fight it is to pretend it's legitimate competition, and figure out how to compete with it.

Speaking of which, watch Good Copy Bad Copy. You can download it from The Pirate Bay. I promise it's legal, and it's worth illustrating how it's not just a few "unique snowflakes" who are actually creating, not only without the benefit of copyright, but sometimes creating things which would not be possible if they respected copyright.

Re:A Strawman for the Symptom (1)

Snaller (147050) | more than 5 years ago | (#26876863)

"If Copyright were only 1 year, do you really think that people wouldn't still be pirating films by aXXo the day of DVD release?"

Do you really think it would matter? I know people who were really looking forward to a pirate copy of Harry potter, then they were looking forward to seeing it in the Cinema, then they were looking forward to be able to buy the dvd.

If you make quality people will buy it, if you make shit they won't. The length of time is a question of morality, even 1 year is too much. But 95 years is sick.

"The Pirate Bay is about theft, plain and simple."

False. You can't steal a non physical object. No stealing is going on there. But a lot of copyright violations are.

"People pirate movies because they want to watch movies without paying for them"

Or because they want to watch something now, not a long time from now. However the amoral copyright system screws you, you can't get your money back if you didn't like the movie. Another reason why this is not real property.

"But you are not the majority. The majority are thieves."

None of them are thieves, but a lot of them probably found that the industry had, yet again, tried to trick them into paying for something which had no value.

Re:A Strawman for the Symptom (5, Insightful)

jollyreaper (513215) | more than 5 years ago | (#26876921)

People pirate movies because they want to watch movies without paying for them. If you're one of the unique snowflakes that pirates movies because you bought every DVD on earth and just want a nicer and non-DRM format, that's cute. But you are not the majority. The majority are thieves.

Absolutely. That's the reason why the iTunes store failed all those years back. Same thing happened with Steam.

Re:A Strawman for the Symptom (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26876925)

Pirates are not your market. DRM works against the recording industry mainly because they punish the consumer while doing little to thwart actual pirates. Even effective DRM would only hinder and annoy the people who ARE your market, and if anything, decrease your sales. Pirates are NOT potential buyers, so why prevent them from stealing your work? Instead, endear yourself to your real customers - the consumers who actually buy your albums and songs. Lower prices, make manipulation of your media easy and fetter-free, and smile upon those who pay to make you wealthy.

Re:A Strawman for the Symptom (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26876363)

Dear music/movie/TV shows corporations/companies/whatever:

The only way to make piracy go away is to make your goods available to everyone (1), at a fair price (2) without the DRM (3) and in standard formats (4).

1: drop the damn "only available to countries x,y and z" crap
2: 1$ for a tune and 2$ for a single episode of a TV show is a rip-off
3: the music industry finally understood that part, though they increased the price of new tunes by 30 cents
4: hopefully, MP4 (AAC and H.264) are becoming the norm instead of that hack of a format that is DivX (fucking AVI container from hell).

Re:A Strawman for the Symptom (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26876365)

I think it's naive to say that piracy will ever go away. If you give people value for money and don't treat them like criminals from the get go however, then you will most certainly see a major drop in pirated content. The trick as always is make it easy for people to spend money and make them not regret it.

Re:A Strawman for the Symptom (5, Interesting)

Sparton (1358159) | more than 5 years ago | (#26876373)

Songs cost $1 to download when they should cost 11 cents with ten cents going to the artist and one cent going to the host/distributor.

Well, if we're dealing with iTunes (the biggest and most popular distributor of music that I know of), don't forget that Apple takes it's 30%, not ~8% you infer would be fair. That leaves 70% for the artist and the label (if appropriate) to deal with (and you can really do without the latter in many cases).

Also, I don't think that most artists could live off of 10 cents a song for downloads (or the $1-1.5 an album) unless they have a very good PR plan/comity to not get lost in the giant sea that is the iTunes store.

Mostly, I think our disagreements stem from the numbers, which are easily adjustable. At least we agree that the methods could change (and roughly what directions to go from what we currently have).

Re:A Strawman for the Symptom (2)

the_one(2) (1117139) | more than 5 years ago | (#26876615)

With a price of ~10 cents people could afford to buy a LOT of music. Many people wouldn't hesitate to buy a thousand songs. A lot of people would probably use the same downloading style they use for torrents, i.e downloading every song an artist made if they like the artist.

Re:A Strawman for the Symptom (3, Informative)

Sparton (1358159) | more than 5 years ago | (#26876729)

With a price of ~10 cents people could afford to buy a LOT of music. Many people wouldn't hesitate to buy a thousand songs.

I don't think I agree with that. There are people who would only want to get songs from a few artists, and decreasing the price is not something that will automatically revert equal or more revenue into the same service. If anything, it just means that the need a person has for a service is met for less, and surplus revenue may just as well go to other services not even related to music/movies/games/etc in any way.

There is a finite amount of money a person has to spend. Even after taking into account lines of credit, they can only spend so much. If any given artist is to lower their prices, then that doesn't automatically mean they would get more money from sales. We have people that look at sales trends and other factors with actual math to derive maximum profit with a product or service for this reason.

Re:A Strawman for the Symptom (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26876381)

they're an easy target to set precedence on.

I think the word you are looking for is "precedents".

Re:A Strawman for the Symptom (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26876463)

Um, no. Trying checking a dictionary, m'kay?

Re:A Strawman for the Symptom (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26876595)

How are they innocent..

I understand their argument and think they have a fair chance of getting off on technical issues.. But that just shows the legal system is messed up. I don't think anyone here wouldn't really see their true reason for hosting this site.

A. Their product tailors specifically for pirating.

B. They make money off it which in my mind is the true crime. Offering the service for free is one thing which they could perhaps get away with but making money off it layers another level of "no no".

Its true legal materials could be sent over their service but are you really going to go to "Pirate Bay" to get legal software? Do you go to a brothel to just get a bed?

Re:A Strawman for the Symptom (5, Interesting)

techsoldaten (309296) | more than 5 years ago | (#26876829)

I download various Linux distros from TPB all the time, it's faster than hitting the source sites. If the site exists exclusively for pirating, how is this pirating?

The media hypes up the financial aspects of this greatly. Something tells me the money made off ad revenue barely covers the costs of servers, legal defenses and other aspects of their operations. I guess we will find out for real as the trial proceeds.

I am not endorsing theft, but this is not theft, this is copyright infringement. That is not a technical difference, that is a different class of legal dispute altogether. In most cases, I don't think it is even a criminal offense, but a civil one. Do we really want the police acting as the copyright enforcers for giant corporations?

M

Re:A Strawman for the Symptom (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26876955)

A. Their product tailors specifically for pirating.

They host less copyright infringing media than Google (none being a lot less than Google with its video hosting sites). They offer torrent files which contain no copyright infringing material. There may be an issue with unauthorized use of trademarks in torrent names & files but thats about it.

B. They make money off it which in my mind is the true crime. Offering the service for free is one thing which they could perhaps get away with but making money off it layers another level of "no no".

Their service IS free. I've never paid to use Pirate Bay (nor have I ever seen an advert on there thanks to AdBlock). The money they earn from adverts on their sites pays for hosting & admin costs. You might disagree but unless you have proof to back that up I see no reason to doubt them.

Re:A Strawman for the Symptom (1)

trum4n (982031) | more than 5 years ago | (#26876857)

They are NOT innocent, but what they ARE guilty of shouldn't be a crime.

Try These Criminals Operating From (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26876239)

The White House AND CONGRESS [whitehouse.org] as war criminals instead of trivial P2P.

Yours In Socialism,
Kilgore Trout

Can't they just move to another country? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26876277)

There's got to be some country that can run a tracker that people can't touch.

Re:Can't they just move to another country? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26876343)

Poland? Nobody messes with Poland!

$14.3Million USD in 2 years = 1 Euro (3, Funny)

Adeptus_Luminati (634274) | more than 5 years ago | (#26876331)

The timing is priceless!I can only see this as a heads I win, tails I win for the Pirate Bay....

1) If they win, they win.
2) If they lose and have to pay $150,000 in 2 years or god forbid $14.3 Million USD, it's ok, in 2 years the USD will be as worthless as Zimbabwae dollars, so really $14.3 Million USD will be less than pocket change.

GO PIRATE BAY!

Re:$14.3Million USD in 2 years = 1 Euro (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26876753)

No trees were killed in the making of this post; however, many trillions of electrons were horribly inconvinienced. inconvinienced inconvenienced

Re:$14.3Million USD in 2 years = 1 Euro (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26876917)

Did this really get modded insightful? Call it funny if you think it is or mod it back down.

Sad. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26876339)


It's sad that big business is harassing these fine young men.

Not a surprise. (0, Redundant)

Computershack (1143409) | more than 5 years ago | (#26876351)

TBH, they brought this on themselves with their childish responses to legal letters. [thepiratebay.org] They'll bleat on and on about search engines like Google and media services like Youtube but they're perceived as responding to IP holders requests, not telling them to fuck off as TPB did.

Re:Not a surprise. (3, Interesting)

Hatta (162192) | more than 5 years ago | (#26876387)

Of course they did. They are, after all, on the right side of Swedish law. All that remains to be seen is whether we can say the same about the Swedish courts.

Re:Not a surprise. (3, Interesting)

an.echte.trilingue (1063180) | more than 5 years ago | (#26876787)

Of course they did. They are, after all, on the right side of Swedish law. All that remains to be seen is whether we can say the same about the Swedish courts.

I dare say that very few of us here are qualified to make that statement, probably including you, my good sir. In fact, I believe that this trial is happening because a large number of lawmakers, layers, and judges in the Sweden can't even answer that question yet. We will soon see if they are breaking the law in Sweden or not, though.

Re:Not a surprise. (5, Insightful)

ObsessiveMathsFreak (773371) | more than 5 years ago | (#26876449)

responding to IP holders requests, not telling them to fuck off as TPB did.

Give me one good moral reason why one shouldn't respond in that way to a cease and desist letter.

Re:Not a surprise. (2, Insightful)

Sparton (1358159) | more than 5 years ago | (#26876621)

Give me one good moral reason why one shouldn't respond in that way to a cease and desist letter.

If you know you're in the moral wrong, or should otherwise know.

Cease and desist letters aren't exclusively evil. They're merely tools. Just like with the Pirate Bay, it is not exclusively a pirating tool, but it can be (and in many cases is) used as such.

Re:Not a surprise. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26876725)

Have you watched Steal this Film ?

it sums up the moral viewpoint quite nicely

Re:Not a surprise. (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26876573)

"they brought this on themselves with their childish responses to legal letters."

It was a totally valid response to utter bullshit... they are breaking no Swedish laws, period.

Apparently you're too rigid in your "I know better than them", thinking to see otherwise.

Hoser

Re:Not a surprise. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26877015)

That's right - it's not whether you are in the right, it's whether you are polite enough to be allowed to have civil rights. Even when there's an honestly applied rule of law it doesn't apply to people who are too overt about it.

Lock these criminals up for life not 2 years (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26876377)

These crooks are stealing the compensation of the hard work of many artists. Theft can not go unpunished.

Re:Lock these criminals up for life not 2 years (1)

Vorpix (60341) | more than 5 years ago | (#26876653)

Piracy is not synonymous with theft. Here's a visual aid [questioncopyright.org] showing the key distinction.

Free Lunch (5, Insightful)

ObsessiveMathsFreak (773371) | more than 5 years ago | (#26876379)

For people who make a living out of creativity or in a creative business, there is scarcely anything more important than to have your rights protected by the law.

Absolutely! I mean it's either that or, horror of horrors, finding salaried employment.

I'm a mathematician. Many Slashdotters are programmers, engineers, etc. Isn't our work creative? How come we don;t get a lifetime +90 years gravy train? Is what we do simply not worth as much to society as movies about comic book superheroes and books about high school for witches and wizards? We don't seem to need protection, so why should artists?

Re:Free Lunch (3, Insightful)

rudeboy1 (516023) | more than 5 years ago | (#26876543)

They're called patents. If you make a nickel off everyone who uses your formula or proof, you're in the same boat as the rest of these cats.

Re:Free Lunch (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26876633)

What patents are the music and movie business defending? I believe you took the wrong boat.

Re:Free Lunch (5, Insightful)

Kell Bengal (711123) | more than 5 years ago | (#26876733)

You obviously haven't applied for a patent recently. Copyright vests automatically with any creative work you produce. To get a patent on the other hand requires lawyers (money), applications (money), review (money), sometimes contestation (money), probation (no money actually), and, if you want a useful term or global scope for it, extension (lots and lots of money). The two are vastly different protections; the barrier to entry for copyright is so low that even this post qualifies for protection (even says so at the bottom of this webpage). I've invented a few valuable things in my time as a research engineer, but the cost of getting protection is so prohibitive that unless I invent the Philosopher's Stone it's not worth it.

Re:Free Lunch (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26876775)

Yes. And they last for <<95 years and <<most people's lifetimes.

Bad analogy (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 5 years ago | (#26876793)

Many Slashdotters are programmers, engineers, etc. Isn't our work creative? How come we don;t get a lifetime +90 years gravy train?

They're called patents.

Bad analogy. The patent term is five times shorter than the copyright term, and unlike with copyrights, there is no history of repeated legislative extension of the terms of subsisting patents.

Re:Free Lunch (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26876577)

I totally agree with you.

In a totally different order of things, my father is a doctor. And he can have drugs for free, doctors don't make him pay when he needs to cure himself. Drugs companies send him mountains of presents, just in order to be sure he prescribes to his patients their drugs (not being for sale, he doesn't do that)

People who are working in restaurant can eat for lower prices than the ones traditional customers pay.

I am a computer scientist, and what sort of advantages does I have? Nothing. Except that I find quite logical to take advantage of bogus websites or copy softwares for my own use, seeing that like a kind of advantage given to me, computer scientist, by my peers, computer scientists.

(I agree that for you, mathematician, it's even harder to get rewards from the society)

Re:Free Lunch (5, Funny)

ObsessiveMathsFreak (773371) | more than 5 years ago | (#26876739)

(I agree that for you, mathematician, it's even harder to get rewards from the society)

Actually, it's really not a bother. Mathematics is generally its own reward.

Re:Free Lunch (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26876927)

I agree that for you, mathematician, it's even harder to get rewards from the society)

As with your father the GP. Good mathematicians (usually also, real Doctors, as in PhD) get free books from some editorials.

Both my parents are academics (my mother a professor and my father retired) and they have received plenty of free books through all their careers.

Re:Free Lunch (1, Insightful)

cliffski (65094) | more than 5 years ago | (#26876657)

wow. bit of a big chip on the shoulder there. Let me explain why you do not earn the same amount of money as the *evil* musicians and J K rowling.

1) You do.
99.9% of people working in games/software/music/movies/books/tv make pretty much the average wage or less. This includes people who are actually working for royalties and running their own business. Even those who *do* earn more than you in royalties end up with less, because they pay accountancy fees and business taxes first, then have to (probably) rent some premises, and pay for stuff like computers, office equipment, pensions etc, all of which come with your job.

2) They are being compensated for risk.
Unlike bankers, who get bailed out by the govt when they fuck up, Nobody bails you out if your movie/album/book flops.
These people are taking a huge amount of risk with their money. Attenboriuygh remortgaged his house to help pay to make ghandi, and he had already made it at that point. George Lucas risked everything he owned several times in his career to help fund his movies.
People making creative works do not get a salary all the time they are working on those products. Its a huge fucking gamble, and often you lose. The free market compensates people for risk, as a rational market should do.

My best mate is a physicist. He earns a salary, and no doubt he is also envious of madonna and bill gates. He, however mnuch much preferes the security of a guaranteed salary each month, as I presume you do. Will you work for the next 3 years for free, betting 3 years income on the success of your maths work over that period?

Most people will not. It's lately become fashionable to whine about this, as a pretext for getting free stuff.

Re:Free Lunch (1)

DrSkwid (118965) | more than 5 years ago | (#26876691)

While I think 90 years is far too long, how long should we get to recoup the $200k a low budget feature film costs to make?

Would TPB not post trackers for the first 5 years of a film's release?

How long do you wait until you d/l it instead of recipricating our efforts?

Re:Free Lunch (5, Informative)

MobileTatsu-NJG (946591) | more than 5 years ago | (#26876699)

I'm a mathematician. Many Slashdotters are programmers, engineers, etc. Isn't our work creative? How come we don;t get a lifetime +90 years gravy train? Is what we do simply not worth as much to society as movies about comic book superheroes and books about high school for witches and wizards?

The truth is you're replacable. In most cases in the area you have described a dude can be dropped and another dude instantly dropped in his place. That's why.

Let me put it another way: I am an artist. I work on movies. I don't get the gravy train, either. Why? Despite being in a creative position, I'm in a replacable creative position. Somebody else can take my place and get the job done. I cannot do what the actors do. Replace the principal actor with me and the movie won't make as many millions of dollars. Replace the script-writer with me and bam, exact same problem.

It has nothing to do with the importance of mathematics. It's all about supply and demand, not about importance or what's fair.

Re:Free Lunch (1)

xtracto (837672) | more than 5 years ago | (#26876705)

I'm a mathematician. Many Slashdotters are programmers, engineers, etc. Isn't our work creative? How come we don;t get a lifetime +90 years gravy train?

Write a book and enjoy the 90+ years of revenue... until TeamLiB warezez your book.

Re:Free Lunch (2, Interesting)

anagama (611277) | more than 5 years ago | (#26876783)

Absolutely! I mean it's either that or, horror of horrors, finding salaried employment.

I'm a mathematician. Many Slashdotters are programmers, engineers, etc. Isn't our work creative? How come we don;t get a lifetime +90 years gravy train?

You can try to get on that "gravy train". Of course, you will have to go into business for yourself, put everything you own at risk, forgo or defer the many conveniences and benefits of having a steady reliable income, and create something that many people want. There is potential to do very well, and a million times more potential to simply fail and burn through your savings.

I think many (not all) who enjoy benefits of "salaried employment", such as easy access to home loans, a predicable income, stability, and comparatively low stress levels, fail to understand the risks and the downsides inherent in trying to live and prosper independently of the mothership, and overestimate how easy it is to ride the "gravy train".

Re:Free Lunch (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26876901)

Agreed, from the musician's side of things. If I'm not working, I'm not getting paid. If I expect to get paid for a track I dropped twenty years ago, why wouldn't I be paying the guy who built my driveway every time I use it?

And besides: I don't know too many people making significant money from recorded material. I recoup the costs of every demo CD I've ever produced every time I play a weekly show.

Re:Free Lunch (1)

b4dc0d3r (1268512) | more than 5 years ago | (#26876929)

Depending on Bilski, computer software and mathematics can be covered by both copyright and patent, so you're actually better off than most. Blame society for pointing the gravy train at entertainment instead of research and foundations that make entertainment possible. Or blame yourself for choosing the wrong career.

Writers just get royalties. Musicians have a "day job" touring, and also have record sales which are the royalties. Some artists get a set price per work, which may represent the number of hours work combined with how impressed the artist is with himself, but no royalties or day job. And don't get me started on patrons.

Salary, hourly, overtime or no, benefits or no... Everyone gets paid a little differently.

Re:Free Lunch (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26876939)

Good ol' slashdot mods. Always misclicking the "insightful" option instead of "flamebait".

Re:Free Lunch (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26876953)

Maybe I speak for other progressive, creative content producers here when I ask....

Where do we register our interests and opinions in this case?

If, after all, it has international ramifications, who is representing the interests of creative producers? I am of the informed and considered opinion that copyright should be severely restricted if not abolished, and that the "Pirate Bay" are doing a useful service toward dissemination and awareness of my creative products. It is certainly not the IFPI that represents _ME_.

So who does?

Hoping their go-to mantra holds out (4, Insightful)

rudeboy1 (516023) | more than 5 years ago | (#26876383)

As I understand it, TPB has long held that the website does not contain any copyrighted material, and that they don't distribute any copyrighted material. I guess what I'm getting is that the prosecution is trying to prove that pointing out the location of copyrighted material is a crime.

Given that corporate greed is a constant, (as evidenced by the US banks, who hoarde bailout money and spend it on sports stadium naming rights in the face of imminent economic collapse) I see this snowballing to the point where companies that manufacture software, like BitTorrent and Azureus will soon come under fire. They tried this with the gun industry, and have had mixed results for years. I think it's rediculous that you should be held accountable for someone potentially doing something illegal with the software you designed in good faith, and under the allowance of current law. It's an erosion of rights thorugh corporate lobbying that leads to this sort of behavior. As others have stated, artists won't see any extra income if bittorrent traffic in its entirety (not at stake in this trial, I know) comes to a halt. In fact,there is a good chance, I think, that the media companies pushing this witch hunt will find that even if they were somehow successful in completely ceasing all P2P trading of their content, they would not see any increase in revenue. To the contrary, the large population of people that hear about an artist via the medium will no longer have access to this method, and the proliferation of new music will slow down considerably, fueled only by expensive promoting methods. If the media companies want their 1970's revenues back, so be it. But I think they're also looking at 1970's revenue minus the adjustment for inflation.

Re:Hoping their go-to mantra holds out (0)

Cillian (1003268) | more than 5 years ago | (#26876539)

I love TPB as much as the next guy, but to be fair, they aren't just pointing out the location, they are to a large extend facilitating the infringement. To give a classic poor analogy, they aren't just telling you where the drug dealer lives, they are his PA. And, duly, they are getting boned for accessory to copyright infringement, which sounds about right (Though where you draw the line is debatable. By the same merit the people who invented the modern computer are accessories to copyright infringement).

Re:Hoping their go-to mantra holds out (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26876809)

I don't see Crackberry getting sued for being used to co-ordinate drug traffic, tough. Perhaps you would like to try again with the analogy?

Re:Hoping their go-to mantra holds out (1)

SanityInAnarchy (655584) | more than 5 years ago | (#26876845)

At the same time, what they are really doing here is no different than Freenet -- or Google, for that matter. They are facilitating the transfer of any file you want. Their only crime, I suppose, is not censoring access to copyrighted material -- as they are certainly not the ones posting such material.

Re:Hoping their go-to mantra holds out (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26877007)

And for those people who aren't obtaining illegal services from the person who happens to also be a drug dealer?

It's more like the observation that a phone company will list the phone number for a drug dealer just like any of their other customers. Should they be sued for "facilitating drug dealing"? Should they be tasked to investigate whether or not any of their potential customers are drug dealers before signing them up?

You're right that they "are to a large extent facilitating the infringement", but so does a library by loaning books and by having photocopiers in the building. They are pointing people at sources of copyrighted material and effectively saying "It's up to you to determine whether your use is legal or not." There's nothing inherent in the information provided that *IS* infringing. If I use the library catalog to find and then borrow a book to make an illegal copy, is the library in as much trouble as I am?

I understand your point, and if they want to make the case that most of the activity of others that is facilitated by TPB is ultimately illegal, fine. They're probably right. But A) plenty of activity is still legal (e.g., when Nine Inch Nails released their recent album there), and B) I don't see anything wrong with what TPB is doing itself by providing this service. It's the people abusing it and committing the infringement that should be brought up on charges.

Re:Hoping their go-to mantra holds out (1)

EvilIdler (21087) | more than 5 years ago | (#26876965)

I don't think they can go after the makers of BitTorrent clients, especially since some of the big media companies have deals with some of the makers. Did you know that cars are used to smuggle illegal goods across country borders? Some people - criminals, that is - have cars entirely for the purpose of smuggling!

Shitty car-analogy quota fulfilled :P

Slashdot... (5, Funny)

socrplayr813 (1372733) | more than 5 years ago | (#26876395)

It doesn't exactly read correctly, but this being Slashdot, I know I wasn't the only one who read that as "The International Federation of Pornographic Industry (IFPI)."

Re:Slashdot... (0)

krystar (608153) | more than 5 years ago | (#26876661)

what u think this is? /b/? ...oh wait..it's not far from. ok so rule 34 applies. cause i'm sure the the REAL International Federation of Pornographic Industry won't be far behind when this trial goes through.

this is retarded (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26876409)

this is going to set a terrible precedent if they lose.

This is like saying bob linked to jim's site and jim put up illegal material and bob is guilty for providing access. its just absurd.

Fair reward! (2, Insightful)

mehrtash (1479181) | more than 5 years ago | (#26876417)

... "Stating, For people who make a living out of creativity or in a creative business, there is scarcely anything more important than to have your rights protected by the law. Copyright exists to ensure that everyone in the creative world from the artist to the record label, from the independent film producer to the TV program maker - can choose how their creations are distributed and get fairly rewarded for their work." Hmmm... if the producers are "fairly" rewarded, why do the headquarters of records labels and TV broadcasters drive limos and swim in a pool of dollars, while the content makers -the real artists- usually live a miserable life (I'm not talking about those very well rewarded people who make porno-pop-music for the big guys of course). I hate the way greedy people try to disguise their cruel intentions through giving false credit to the poor.

Re:Fair reward! (1)

Aphoxema (1088507) | more than 5 years ago | (#26876801)

Because suffering sells better! They only give the money to the artists who the demographic find more appealing when they have tons of money to spend frivolously.

I'm just talking out my ass, but it seems to make sense.

Sorry, they do deserve to be prosecuted... (1, Troll)

Smidge207 (1278042) | more than 5 years ago | (#26876439)

For people who make a living out of creativity or in a creative business, there is scarcely anything more important than to have your rights protected by the law. Copyright exists to ensure that everyone in the creative world from the artist to the record label, from the independent film producer to the TV maker - can choose how their creations are distributed and get fairly rewarded for their work.

The operators of The Pirate Bay have violated those rights and they continue to do so to make substantial revenues. That kind of abuse of the rights of others cannot be allowed to continue, and that is why theses scoundrels should be punished.

The criminal prosecution of The Pirate Bay is about protecting creators from those who violate their rights and deprive them of their deserved rewards. The simple fact is: The Pirate Bay hurts creators of many different kinds of works, from music to film, from books to TV. It has been particularly harmful in distributing copyrighted works prior to their official release. This damages sales of music at the most important time of their life cycle.

=Smidge=

Re:Sorry, they do deserve to be prosecuted... (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26876509)

This is about protecting the distributors, not the creators.
I didn't see any one go to jail when the Sonny Bono Copyright Act was passed. That was one of the largests thefts of "IP" of all time.

Re:Sorry, they do deserve to be prosecuted... (1)

MobileTatsu-NJG (946591) | more than 5 years ago | (#26876785)

It has been particularly harmful in distributing copyrighted works prior to their official release. This damages sales of music at the most important time of their life cycle.

Okay, let's see the proof of this. Produce numbers, please.

Re:Sorry, they do deserve to be prosecuted... (5, Insightful)

BlueStrat (756137) | more than 5 years ago | (#26876919)

The Pirate Bay hurts creators of many different kinds of works, from music to film, from books to TV.

Actually, I *am* a musician in a band, and I've put our original recordings up on TPB. Recordings have become a promotional tool, not a main means of income. It doesn't matter what anyone's opinion regarding it is, it's the reality that computers, digital technology, and the internet has brought into existence. Unless governments all over the world decide simultaneously to unplug all the networks, confiscate all the PCs, and remove all rights and all privacy for normal citizens, this will continue to be the case.

Attempting to use legal means to change this is akin to passing laws against gravity, and both will enjoy equal success.

Cheers!

Strat

All copyright claims are bogus except (0)

microbee (682094) | more than 5 years ago | (#26876631)

those from the International Federation of Pornographic Industry. I know I am guilty!

Money better spent (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26876823)

All I have to say on topics such as this is that the amount of money, time, and effort spent fighting piracy could be put toward more productive means. (i.e. feeding the hungry and all that stuff that people actually need.) Tell me that super-star, big-name artists need my $20 for a CD that cost the producers $.02 to cut... I understand on the smaller scale - the band that plays at the local bar, the up-and-coming features, that sort of thing, sure I'll support If they're good.

Once people finally allow themselves to realize that piracy is here to stay, regardless of legality and moral issues, then they'll come up with more creative ways to distribute and entertain. Anything electronic is accessible, despite the great lengths that are taken to safeguard it. Come to my area - or anywhere within a 3-hour radius and I'll gladly support you by coming to a concert, buying a $6 beer and a t-shirt/cd/poster whatever I can.

Piratebay.org and sister-sites aren't going anywhere...

sorry all

This should never be a crime (4, Insightful)

macemoneta (154740) | more than 5 years ago | (#26876871)

The Pirate Bay does nothing more than a phone book does. That is, it provides a reference or index entry to an actual object.

If what the Pirate Bay does is illegal, then phone book publishers should be prosecuted for listing felons and scams. After all, by this flawed thinking, the listing of the contact information facilitates the felonies and scams of the individuals represented by the entry.

This is obviously nonsensical. Why do people lose their critical reasoning ability so easily?

Purpose of copyright (4, Interesting)

GodWasAnAlien (206300) | more than 5 years ago | (#26877011)

IFPI says:
"Copyright exists to ensure that everyone in the creative world from the artist to the record label, from the independent film producer to the TV program maker - can choose how their creations are distributed and get fairly rewarded for their work."

This is false.

Copyright exists (from a US Constitution perspective) "to promote the progress of science and useful arts".

Individual financial compensation is not the purpose. Promoting science and art for the good of the public was the purpose.
Of course, we are now closer to the medieval Stationers publishing monopoly than we are the intent of copyright.
A 95 year publishing retirement package was not the intent of the Constitution.

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>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...