Beta
×

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 Legal Action Dropped In Norway

Soulskill posted more than 4 years ago | from the they-see-which-way-the-cold-wind-is-blowing dept.

Piracy 223

superapecommando writes "Copyright holders have given up legal efforts to force Norwegian ISP Telenor to block filesharing site The Pirate Bay, one of the parties to the case said. The copyright holders, led by Norway's performing rights society TONO and by the International Federation of the Phonographic Industry Norway (IFPI Norge), have lost two rounds in the Norwegian court system, and have now decided against appealing the case to Norway's supreme court."

cancel ×

223 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

All that means... (3, Insightful)

JustShootMe (122551) | more than 4 years ago | (#31488484)

Is that they've figured out another way to accomplish the same ends. It ain't over.

Re:All that means... (1)

bragr (1612015) | more than 4 years ago | (#31488508)

I'm voting ninjas.

Re:All that means... (5, Insightful)

sharkey (16670) | more than 4 years ago | (#31488668)

And remember, when it comes to pseudo-property rights claimed by those who produce nothing of their own, the ends always justify the means.

Re:All that means... (5, Informative)

C4st13v4n14 (1001121) | more than 4 years ago | (#31488874)

The reason why they keep losing in court is because of strong privacy laws in Norway. In order to sue anyone for downloading copyrighted material, it would require the ISPs to identify users by IP addresses, something which is a very big no-no here.

We also have an automatic toll system set up in a few places (on highways entering cities, for example) to automatically scan cars' number (license) plates and send bills to the car owners. This information is deleted as soon as the bills are paid and cannot be used by law enforcement. There are also speed cameras all over that take photos of the driver and automatically blur out the passengers. If you get a ticket as the car owner and you were not driving the car, then you don't have to pay it. My wife drives my car and I driver hers, which completely eliminates these sort of fines. Some people drive with burkas and sunglasses! Motorcyclists cannot get fines as they wear helmets. It's quite an interesting system.

Anyway, this topic has been slashdotted several times already, most recently here [slashdot.org] .

Re:All that means... (5, Funny)

Darkness404 (1287218) | more than 4 years ago | (#31488994)

Don't you guys get attacked by terrorists every single day then? Because over here in the US if you don't identify everyone based on their IP address we're gonna have 9/11 -EVERY DAY-!

Re:All that means... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31489110)

Maybe the terrorists were unable to find the address of high profile targets due to privacy laws.

Re:All that means... (3, Funny)

shutdown -p now (807394) | more than 4 years ago | (#31489518)

They do, but terrorist attacks are not disclosed to protect the privacy of those involved. ~

Re:All that means... (1)

syousef (465911) | more than 4 years ago | (#31489800)

Don't you guys get attacked by terrorists every single day then? Because over here in the US if you don't identify everyone based on their IP address we're gonna have 9/11 -EVERY DAY-!

Don't you guys get attacked by terrorists every single day then? Because over here in the US if you don't identify everyone based on their IP address we're gonna have 9/11 -EVERY DAY-!

That attack was pioneered by Bill Murray and is referred to as the Groundhog Day attack.

IP address are to litte stop 9/11 as they are to e (1)

Joe The Dragon (967727) | more than 4 years ago | (#31490602)

IP address are to litte stop 9/11 as they are to easy to flag the wrong guy.

Re:All that means... (3, Funny)

BitHive (578094) | more than 4 years ago | (#31489020)

What a socialist nightmare!

Re:All that means... (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31489070)

What a fascist wetdream!

durr (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31489144)

what does words mean?

Re:All that means... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31489344)

THIS IS WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU HAVE SOCIALISM!!!! pure and unadulterated invasion of priva....wait a minute...

That sounds pretty fair, actually...

Maybe the US should become socialist. We'll have more freedom from government oppression!

Re:All that means... (5, Interesting)

Kjella (173770) | more than 4 years ago | (#31489370)

The reason why they keep losing in court is because of strong privacy laws in Norway. In order to sue anyone for downloading copyrighted material, it would require the ISPs to identify users by IP addresses, something which is a very big no-no here.

Actually, they don't get that far. The biggest blocker for them right now is that their license to store private surveillance data from public networks has been refused by the Data Inspectorate, so they simply aren't getting started. The police is obviously not wasting their time investigating it. Right now the winds are blowing quite strongly in the direction of privacy, we may *crosses fingers* refuse EU's data storage directive, that'll be a first in 16 years.

In Sweden they know that any real anti-piracy crackdown would bring the Pirate Party into parliament, despite all the noise when the Pirate Party entered the EU parliament last year there's been essentially no legal activity and the file sharing is already at new heights, higher than before the FRA law, It's no wonder why they make their best offers like free Spotify in Scandinavia, they're trying desperately to hold the flood gates.

It's just like when Microsoft sees they could lose their dominance somewhere and offer a supergood deal to keep them on Windows. They know if copying for non-commercial use is legalized in one country, that country will become the center of all hubs and trackers and seedboxes and vpn services bringing the whole house of cards down. And technology keeps working against them all the time, if you have a 1 Mbit line letting someone leech from you really eats into your bandwidth but if you have 100 Mbit you barely notice. It's just borrowing away a little bit of what you're not using yourself.

"They know if copying for non-commercial use" (1)

unity100 (970058) | more than 4 years ago | (#31489774)

is legalized in one country"

youre talking about spain.

Re:All that means... (1)

shoehornjob (1632387) | more than 4 years ago | (#31489528)

Is that they've figured out another way to accomplish the same ends. It ain't over yet because the lawyers have resorted to injecting massive amounts of malware into the torrents.

Re:All that means... (1)

Runaway1956 (1322357) | more than 4 years ago | (#31489782)

The malware means nothing to people like me. Well - maybe not "nothing", but damned close to it. If I decide to download a torrent, only to find that it's corrupt and/or carrying a payload, I've wasted the download time. The malware runs in a virtual machine, if at all, and I can restore the virtual machine instantly. The REAL machine won't run windows executables, so I'm safe, safe, safe. (no, I don't have Wine installed, or any of those new cutesy programs that rely on Wine)

So, come on, RIAA - if malware is all you have to offer, hit me with your best shot!

Meh... (5, Insightful)

bragr (1612015) | more than 4 years ago | (#31488486)

I'm still going to be a rebel and buy my games, books, and music anyway. Its what all the cool kids are doing now.

Re:Meh... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31488676)

I view pirating stuff as a moral right, but one that should be exercised with forethought - by pirating windoze instead of using linux, you're still helping windoze. Pirating $FPS-du-jour instead of playing Nexuiz/OpenArena/Warsow/Sauerbraten is also harmful.

Re:Meh... (0)

JMatopos (1768008) | more than 4 years ago | (#31488760)

By pirating "Windoze":

- You're making legitimate customers pay more - harming them;
- You're reducing the profits of microsoft - harming them, their employees, shareholders and families thereof;
- You're giving file sharing bad publicity - harming the legal uses of it;
- You're making software developers resort to DRM - harming everyone;

In fact, the only one who you're helping is yourself. Get off your high horse. You've no more 'moral right' to do this than you have to steal a car.

Re:Meh... (2, Insightful)

jx100 (453615) | more than 4 years ago | (#31488820)

How is he exactly doing any of that?

The increase in price is something Microsoft sets.
The reduction in profits is just an ephemeral reduction that would've happened in the exact same amount had he gone with linux.
Bad publicity I could sort of buy, but that could easily be attributed to the copyright holders (who have loads of money to make it look bad) as opposed to the masses of poor copyright infringers.
Software developers all have the choice to implement DRM or not, and even those who have software copied may not necessarily choose to implement DRM.

Re:Meh... (0, Troll)

JMatopos (1768008) | more than 4 years ago | (#31489048)

"How is he exactly doing any of that?"

The increase in price is set by Microsoft at a level that will give them a modest profit once they have covered their own expenses - if they have to employ developers to implement e.g. WGA (a direct backlash against pirated copies of windows) then their own expenses will rise - and so will the price we pay for it.

If in addition some of the people who pirate windows would pay for it if they were unable to pirate it (as assuredly a small proportion of them would), then that's a reduction in profits.

Admittedly it might be a relatively small effect, but it's there. Pirating windows, contrary to what the parent of my post claimed, does not help microsoft. I would expect that it slightly harms everyone but the person receiving windows for free.

"Software developers all have the choice to implement DRM or not, and even those who have software copied may not necessarily choose to implement DRM."

Certainly, but more pirating seems very likely to lead to more DRM. Do you think that Ubisoft would have put their ill-conceived needs-internet-connection DRM on Assassins Creed 2 if they weren't worried about their product being copied?

Re:Meh... (1)

TikiTDO (759782) | more than 4 years ago | (#31489736)

Microsoft sets the prices at an arbitrary level that it feels will result in the biggest profits. They understand perfectly well that if they were to say, increase the price by 50% then a lot less people would buy it, regardless if they downloaded it or not. However, if they were to drop it by 50% then though they may have more paying customers they would net less money. So no, piracy has little to nothing to do with the price of Windows. This is all the magic of the supply and demand curve.

Next, I will grant that some of the people that pirate windows would have bought it had piracy been impossible, but consider this: what about the people that pirated the new windows, liked it, and told their normal friends to get it. Normal friends that know about as much about torrents as Joe Average knows about quantum mechanics. Taking away piracy would result in a net loss of advertisement, and from that, profit.

In all, I would say that for Microsoft, windows piracy has a neutral direct economic effect, and a positive overall economic effect by allowing them to claim greater market penetration, and therefore charge more for the associated services like driver signing. They can also bump up the prices of developer tools, since using said tools on a well established system is worth more than using those tools on a system barely anyone uses.

Finally, I am not entirely sure what point you are trying to make with AC2. Ubisoft wasted what must have been a good chunk of resources to develop a DRM that was supposed to stop piracy in its tracks, and it was cracked within a day. This sounds to me like a horrible business decision more than anything else. Did the pirates walk into the Ubisoft HQ, and force them to implement that DRM system? Certainly not. Would they have gotten more money had they skipped the DRM system? Possibly. Did Ubisoft actually consider the benefits of having this new DRM system of theirs? Most certainly not. Let bad decisions rest at the feet of those who made them.

Re:Meh... (3, Insightful)

Runaway1956 (1322357) | more than 4 years ago | (#31489874)

"Pirating windows, contrary to what the parent of my post claimed, does not help microsoft."

You've forgotten that Bill Gates used to gloat over piracy in places like India. He likes to have his software pirated, for precisely the same reasons he offers huge discounts to schools. Like a drug pusher, he wants to see them hooked early.

"It's easier for our software to compete with Linux when there's piracy than when there's not."

-Bill Gates

In an interview with Walt Mossberg and Kara Swisher of Wall Street Journal, Bill Gates admitted to watching pirated movies on the Internet. Here are some excerpts from the interview posted on AOL News:

MR. MOSSBERG: Talk about YouTube. What do you think about that? Why aren't you doing something like that?

MR. GATES: If we did YouTube, we'd be in a lot of trouble. First of all, people would say, "How do you make money?" Second, they'd say, what about all that copyright violation taking place up there. It's a neat site. I saw a bunch of old Harlem Globetrotters movies up there the other night, it's great.

Re:Meh... (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31488896)

- You're making legitimate customers pay more - harming them;

Not if the person wasn't going to buy it anyway (eg. would run Linux in the absence of pirate Windoze)

- You're reducing the profits of microsoft - harming them, their employees, shareholders and families thereof;

See above

- You're giving file sharing bad publicity - harming the legal uses of it;

Yep, that's bad, and also giving Windoze free publicity, by using it

- You're making software developers resort to DRM - harming everyone;

A good thing, as it is an additional motivation to use Free Software

Re:Meh... (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 4 years ago | (#31489332)

You're making software developers resort to DRM - harming everyone;

A good thing, as it is an additional motivation to use Free Software

True, but not all works of authorship are "software", and the publishers of works other than software have done things to harm free software. For example, people in the United States (home of Slashdot) cannot play DVDs using free software.

Re:Meh... (2, Funny)

BitHive (578094) | more than 4 years ago | (#31489078)

Why should I pay for your health care? I don't have kids.
Why should I pay for your education? I have Wikipedia.
Why should I pay for your OS? I have Linux.

In short, the people arguing that everyone should buy intellectual property are the worst kind of socialists in wolves clothing.

Re:Meh... (2, Insightful)

NeutronCowboy (896098) | more than 4 years ago | (#31489424)

You're assuming that pirates would have paid for the content if it had not been available via filesharing. That's an unsupported assumption. Not only that, it flies in the face of Econ 101: a product that is free has higher demand than a non-free one.

Re:Meh... (5, Interesting)

jez9999 (618189) | more than 4 years ago | (#31488762)

I pay a monthly Sky subscription of ~£15/month. I just signed up to sky.com's Sky Player and supplied account info so they knew it was really me, who pays my subscription. They recognized the packages I subscribe to. I wanted to catch up with a House, MD episode. They wanted to charge me £1.50 to 'rent' it (ie. play it once in their player). I just torrented it.

As long as media corporations are so unreasonable, I reserve the right to say, fuck them. Copyright law should be reformed to allow people to pay what is reasonable, then pirate on a noncommercial basis. It's the lesser of the evils, vs. corps charging what the market will bear.

Re:Meh... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31488854)

To Watch this show over the Zune Marketplace you would net yourself almost $8 in MS points. Why not torrent? You're going to goto work the next day and tell your co-workers / friends how much you enjoyed it! Thats free advertising for them.

Re:Meh... (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 4 years ago | (#31489356)

You're going to goto work the next day and tell your co-workers / friends how much you enjoyed it! Thats free advertising for them.

Then what's the free [freedomdefined.org] alternative to House MD?

Re:Meh... (1)

TikiTDO (759782) | more than 4 years ago | (#31489772)

Watching it on the TV?

And yes, there are ads, but ads do not result in reduced profits, so it is free financially. Or you might have TiVo, in which case it's not any different from watching torrents in the first place.

Re:Meh... (1)

Runaway1956 (1322357) | more than 4 years ago | (#31489908)

Dating a doctor? There was this little bitty lady who worked with my son when he had surgery, she had the biggest Betty Boop eyes - man, oh man. I could get into that!

Re:Meh... (1)

kimvette (919543) | more than 4 years ago | (#31490120)

Or, if it's available on hulu or crackle, you can watch standard def streams of the shows a week after broadcast, totally for free. Not only do you get to watch the shows, but the producers earn fair revenue in exchange. Nothing is "stolen" in the process, and by supporting such streaming services, you are showing the producers it doesn't have to be an all-or-nothing situation.

Re:Meh... (1)

madsenj37 (612413) | more than 4 years ago | (#31489126)

As long as they price things out of a range you consider reasonable, i.e, you not only have enough money to purchase and you desire to purchase at that price, you are not what they consider a customer anyways. They cannot expect you to buy and should not consider it lost revenue. Maybe that is just my business school education talking though; I have never been to law school.

Re:Meh... (1)

brit74 (831798) | more than 4 years ago | (#31489634)

.. except, of course, when pirating is available and their opinion of 'reasonable price' is subject to whim, then the calculations go right out the window. For example: I pay hundreds of dollars to fly on an airplane. If I discovered a completely foolproof way to fly anywhere I want for free, then my opinion of "reasonable price" for air-fare suddenly shifts. I suddenly decide that $300 is far too much for air-fare (even though I've paid more than that in the past, when my options were "pay $300 and fly" or "don't fly"). At this point, my opinions about "reasonable price" are suddenly unhinged from anything. I can decide that flights need to be $20, or else "it's not reasonable".

Re:Meh... (2, Insightful)

madsenj37 (612413) | more than 4 years ago | (#31490074)

In the case you present, the profit models need to change. Free music can lead to better more people buying merchandise and going to shows for example. Or pioneering technology like 3D that is too expensive and/or not available and gives an experience that pirating cannot. Ways of profiting are there, they have just changed.

Re:Meh... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31490340)

That would be Frank Abagnale. They made a movie about him. Perhaps you should try to catch it if you can.

Re:Meh... (0, Troll)

cecom (698048) | more than 4 years ago | (#31489318)

Who gave you the idea that you are entitled to watch back episodes for free? Is that like a basic human right or something? If you don't like their prising, buy the dvd, a tivo, or find another provider (my cable company lets me watch old episodes for free). Just because you think something should cost less, doesn't give you the right to steal it.

Yes, it is a human right (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31489664)

Who gave you the idea that you are entitled to watch back episodes for free? Is that like a basic human right or something?

UN declaration of human rights clearly states the rights to enjoy art and culture as universal human rights. You should read it sometime, I bet the country you live in has signed it.

So, it is a duty of the state to make sure that art and culture is available to you (which means: it needs to be affordable). Also, art is extremely objective. You can't just say "You can listen artist X for free" because others might not consider that as art. So, if a country has signed the declaration of human rights, it needs to make sure that its citizens have access to very varying kinds of art & culture.

Now, whether this extends to specific instances (such as specific TV show) is arguable. I would say that in some cases it does: Some works (the simpsons show, LotR books, Lion King, etc...) have became so essential part of our culture that you need to have access to that.

The declaration also states that artists need to be able to profit from their work. So, if the state decides something to be so essential part of the culture that people need to have free access to it, the state also needs to pay something to the artist.

CAPTCHA: Concerto

Re:Meh... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31490378)

What exactly do you consider reasonable. Sounds like you want everything for free and don't care who you don't pay. So tell me what value you add to society so I can just take it.

Re:Meh... (1)

TimHunter (174406) | more than 4 years ago | (#31490572)

As long as media corporations are so unreasonable, I reserve the right to say, fuck them.

Fuck yeah. I say, "Media corporations, you're so unreasonable I don't want your damn content. Keep it. I'll find some other way to entertain myself."

Re:Meh... (1)

nurb432 (527695) | more than 4 years ago | (#31489092)

Good luck finding something worth buying.

Re:Meh... (1)

eclectechie (411647) | more than 4 years ago | (#31489134)

You can keep your games, the library has the books I don't buy, and I buy my music.

However, money can't buy the BBC Formula 1 television coverage over here in Canada, and the TSN excerpts are abysmal.

North American Formula 1 fans NEED torrents to get what the people of Great Britain get as a matter of course.

And to you wonderful people who record the BBC coverage and upload the torrents, thank you, thank you, THANK YOU!

Re:Meh... (1)

compro01 (777531) | more than 4 years ago | (#31489386)

You might look into Shaw direct (formerly known as starchoice). They carry BBC and BBC Canada.

Re:Meh... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31490076)

North American Formula 1 fans NEED torrents to get what the people of Great Britain get as a matter of course.

Yeah, for some fucked-up definition of the word "need".

It's about time! (1)

KennyP (724304) | more than 4 years ago | (#31488490)

Why sue when you know you're gonna LOSE?

Re:It's about time! (5, Funny)

Jazz-Masta (240659) | more than 4 years ago | (#31488682)

Why sue when you know you're gonna LOSE?

Ask SCO.

Re:It's about time! (2, Funny)

ImprovOmega (744717) | more than 4 years ago | (#31489988)

Why sue when you know you're gonna LOSE?

Ask SCO.

So you're saying that Microsoft is secretly funding them?

Re:It's about time! (1)

betterunixthanunix (980855) | more than 4 years ago | (#31490358)

Would you be surprised? Hm, Microsoft funding someone who is suing a torrent website that encourages people to share...yeah...like that is within the realm of possibility...

Re:It's about time! (2, Insightful)

fusiongyro (55524) | more than 4 years ago | (#31488956)

A reason that comes to mind is precedent. Assuming Norway's supreme court works like America's, if they appeal and lose they won't be able to sue anyone for anything that looks like this again.

By not appealing, they're giving themselves the opportunity to come back and sue all the way to the top with a case they think is more favorable to the outcome they want.

Aren't they still facing jail time? (1)

gront (594175) | more than 4 years ago | (#31488506)

Subject to a pending appeal, don't the guys running it still face a year in jail? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Pirate_Bay_trial [wikipedia.org]

Re:Aren't they still facing jail time? (3, Informative)

Zironic (1112127) | more than 4 years ago | (#31488556)

This is a completely different legal action in an entirely different country. This case was about forcing an ISP to block access to the site.

Re:Aren't they still facing jail time? (1)

gront (594175) | more than 4 years ago | (#31488962)

Right, but before everyone breaks out the champagne and hails the latest pirate-bay-based-lawsuit as a victory, was just pointing out that its not all happy times and file-shared pr0n down pirate bay way.

Re:Aren't they still facing jail time? (1)

gmhowell (26755) | more than 4 years ago | (#31489738)

Sorry. We're Americans. All them Europeans look and sound alike. (Must have to do with walking, eating right, free healthcare, and socialistcommunistfascistterrorist indoctrination.)

Re:Aren't they still facing jail time? (2, Informative)

jonbryce (703250) | more than 4 years ago | (#31488980)

That's in Sweden which is the country next door to Norway.

Stop stealing you fucking faggots (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31488510)

Ante up or stick to the public domain offerings, you faggot shit eating faggot bitches.




Faggot.

Re:Stop stealing you fucking faggots (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31488620)

Stop price fixing and trying to thwart actual fair-use and maybe I would. As I see it, I'm just recovering my lost monies from the days of price fixing before digital media, and from all the albums I lost due to CD rot because I wasn't allowed to make a fair use back up. So until you can play nice, don't expect me to....

Re:Stop stealing you fucking faggots (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31489432)

Ummm... so you claim you lost albums because you weren't willing to do something that you claim that is illegal to back them up (which I'm not convinced it's illegal at all. it's sounding like a strawman to me) but you're willing to download which is illegal and you're much much more likely to get caught?

You're an idiot and the people who've modded you up have aligned themselves with an idiot.

Re:Stop stealing you fucking faggots (1)

Deus.1.01 (946808) | more than 4 years ago | (#31489714)

Remember that pretty thing called DMCA....you know that pretty little thing where you arent suppose to circumvent DRM's.

THANKFULLY! Norway gives the FINGER to DMCA when it comes to this....OUR CONSUMER rights trumps DRM shit.

Re:Stop stealing you fucking faggots (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31488740)

Times are tough. Yet, I can afford the finest and firmest shits to eat and the hunkiest, studliest faggots to buttsex with using the money I saved pirating...no, stealing your worthless garbage.

Fuck you, content providers. Your number's up. I have all the good content there is to have. My gigabytes and gigabytes of media that I stole from you is good enough to tide me over for the rest of my life. You could cut of my internet connection tomorrow and you'll still never see a fucking dime from me. You already lost. Fuck you.

Re:Stop stealing you fucking faggots (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31489334)

I find your ideas intriguing and wish to subscribe to your newsletter.

Re:Stop stealing you fucking faggots (2, Insightful)

kimvette (919543) | more than 4 years ago | (#31490164)

"My gigabytes and gigabytes of media that I stole from you is good enough to tide me over for the rest of my life. "

You've stolen from them? As in film reels, tapes, and hard disks? If so, you deserve to do jailtime.

If by "stole" you mean "downloaded" then you have stolen nothing. You have infringed on copyrights, which may or may not be legal in your locale. You might have deprived a lackey at one of those production houses (record label, movie producer, TV producer, etc.) a job or a raise, but come on. You've stolen nothing.

If you're so intent on getting stuff for free, why not turn to Pandora, crackle, hulu, and the like? There is a lot of free content up there. By doing what you're doing, and bragging about it with that attitude you have, you are only giving the MPAA and RIAA ammo to say "See? See? This kind of asshattery is why P2P should be illegal."

keep on trucking (0, Troll)

BitHive (578094) | more than 4 years ago | (#31489062)

go away you uppity socialist homophobe

Re:keep on trucking (1)

Deus.1.01 (946808) | more than 4 years ago | (#31489766)

Who is the GNAA member....him or you?!

Yaarrr!!! (0, Redundant)

Starteck81 (917280) | more than 4 years ago | (#31488514)

Yaaarrr!!!!... now walk the plank.

Buying politicians is cheaper (3, Insightful)

schwit1 (797399) | more than 4 years ago | (#31488562)

The path of least resistance to the ends they want is via campaign contributions and scare-tactic(child pron, terrorism, etc) lobbying.

Re:Buying politicians is cheaper (4, Insightful)

linzeal (197905) | more than 4 years ago | (#31488756)

That is not as easy in western Europe as it is the states, but it still happens. People over there are mildly clued into what is going on in their country even if some still do vote out of irrational fears it is nowhere near as prevalent as it is the states. So they expect their politicians to at least appear to do " the right thing ".

moderation error (0, Offtopic)

BitHive (578094) | more than 4 years ago | (#31489168)

Parent is not a troll, but rather was hastily moderated by one of the people it describes.

Re:Buying politicians is cheaper (1)

JohnnyBGod (1088549) | more than 4 years ago | (#31489364)

Um... not that your point is invalid because of this, but you really should look at a map to see where Norway is.

Re:Buying politicians is cheaper (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31489232)

Except that in Norway, campaign contributions generally bring backlash. We're talking about the country where teleprompters met with public outrage and have not yet caught on.

How many years? (2, Insightful)

fragmentate (908035) | more than 4 years ago | (#31488594)

I'm actually curious how log this has been going on. It seems like the corporations, and legal bodies could find more creative ways to spend the money. I would think paying more money to lawyers would be an obvious negative by now.

The comedians of this world have already written hundreds of jokes about lawyers and their self-serving nature. Maybe these litigious companies will realize, one day, there's a reason why.

Re:How many years? (2, Interesting)

bragr (1612015) | more than 4 years ago | (#31488722)

The original police raid on the Piratebay, which resulted in the four of them being brought up on charges was on May 31, 2006. I believe it then took them about a year to process the 160+ servers, depositions, and other evidence into a 4000 page report. That report was then process down into 60 or so charges.

Re:How many years? (1)

IrquiM (471313) | more than 4 years ago | (#31488748)

Less than a year if I remember correctly. At least not for much longer.

Re:How many years? (4, Insightful)

frank_adrian314159 (469671) | more than 4 years ago | (#31489346)

Maybe these litigious companies will realize, one day, there's a reason why.

Why? The public in general hates the lawyers, not the people who hire them. In fact, the lawyers are acting as a defensive shield for the public scorn that should be heaped on the organizations that hire them to carry out their legal asshattery. As long as people hate the lawyers without questioning who stands behind them, the organizations that hire them will continue to get off scot free.

IFPI Norge (0)

Jake Dodgie (53046) | more than 4 years ago | (#31488660)

Considering that a lot of the Pirate Bay listings are Porn I was impressed to see the International Federation of the Pornographic Industry Norway was taking a stand untill my brain re-registered the name correctly and I realised that are probably a bunch of old guys in beards muttering about all the illegal downloads of 78" vinyl.

Re:IFPI Norge (2, Funny)

Idiomatick (976696) | more than 4 years ago | (#31488750)

They must be REALLY old, those are some big ass records.

Re:IFPI Norge (1)

bughunter (10093) | more than 4 years ago | (#31488944)

That's OK. I misread the first sentence to read, "one of the pirates to the case said."

Re:IFPI Norge (1)

Arancaytar (966377) | more than 4 years ago | (#31489286)

And not the kind of vinyl we might be thinking of, either. :P

I suppose (0)

BigJClark (1226554) | more than 4 years ago | (#31488672)


Its hard to impose your legal code on a foreign country. Maybe they should lobby their host country to form, oh, I dunno, some sort of massive firewall... hmm

Funny enough... (1)

mister_playboy (1474163) | more than 4 years ago | (#31488836)

Sweden and Norway have actually been united as one country [wikipedia.org] at various times in the past.

Re:I suppose (1)

Arancaytar (966377) | more than 4 years ago | (#31489326)

Well... this was legal action started in a Norwegian court by Norwegian plaintiffs against a Norwegian defendant, so I'm not sure where the "foreign" comes into it.

Re:I suppose (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31490026)

Follow the money.

ACTA perhaps? (3, Interesting)

Dan667 (564390) | more than 4 years ago | (#31488788)

Maybe they do not want to lose in the Norwegian Supreme Count that would allow invalidation of ACTA if it is ever implemented in its current terrible form. Governments should not be involved in a the failure of a business model. Organizations like the RIAA need to stop treating their Customers like Criminals.

Re:ACTA perhaps? (2, Informative)

betterunixthanunix (980855) | more than 4 years ago | (#31490382)

From what I hear, the likelihood of Norway agreeing to ACTA is fairly low -- they still value the rights of their citizens more than the interests of foreign companies. Or so I am told.

Pirate Bay appeals likely to start in September (3, Informative)

angry tapir (1463043) | more than 4 years ago | (#31488818)

In other Pirate Bay-related news [goodgearguide.com.au] : "The case against the four people involved in the running of Pirate Bay is heading back to court at the end of September. The appeals trial is tentatively scheduled to start on Sep 28., the Svea Court of Appeals said on Wednesday."

Norway Is A Sane Nation! (1, Insightful)

b4upoo (166390) | more than 4 years ago | (#31488888)

Perhaps one day America can hope to be as sane as Norway!

Re: Norway Is A Sane Nation! (0, Troll)

BitHive (578094) | more than 4 years ago | (#31489026)

nope, their socialest

Re: Norway Is A Sane Nation! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31489204)

nope, their socialest

Yes, because fascism [wikipedia.org] is saner.

Re: Norway Is A Sane Nation! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31489280)

don't be silly fascism has been abolished, like racism in the united states

Re: Norway Is A Sane Nation! (2, Informative)

gertin (1063236) | more than 4 years ago | (#31489068)

We also created this [wikipedia.org] , so be careful with what you wish for.

Re: Norway Is A Sane Nation! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31489406)

Mayhem is an awesome band! Too bad Varg killed the original lead singer of Mayhem. Satanas!

RIAA should go to hell (2, Insightful)

AmonTheMetalhead (1277044) | more than 4 years ago | (#31489256)

It's not like people won't pay for access & ease of use, i pay 3€'s a month to use last.fm for instance (and i use it quite extensively, about 40 to 45 hours a week), and i buy Cd's & dvd's, but I'm not going to pay €'s to get the privilege to watch a drm laden movie or series once, or pay to download songs just to be able to tell if the CD is worth shit

RIAA isn't a problem anymore (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31489728)

RIAA isn't using DRM anymore. Their works are on the market.

It's the MPAA people who currently aren't participating, and therefore can't even say with a straight face, that piracy has cost them sales. Sales of what? You can't buy unDRMed movies. But you can buy unDRMed music. So give the RIAA a break; they aren't a serious problem anymore.

Yeap (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31489566)

Here in Italy, unluckily, the situation is quite the opposite. As you may know we've got recently cut out from Pirate Bay and even quite silently. The route drops after 10-12 hops and can't be avoided with any Internet Provider. I feel like most Italian users aren't complaining that much, just cause they're going elsewhere instead. TPB provided an alternative site which is actually working over here, but how long is that gonna be? Sure it's also an italian translated URL, quite funny, but might not be the right way to play on a wall-wall game. However, it's quite sad and frustrating how they're allowed to censor stuff on command and there isn't really anything to do about that. Norway rox. :)

Obligatory Post (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31490096)

Dear MPAA/RIAA,

I consider myself an honest citizen - but you've harassed and bullied me and you've treated me like a criminal. On top of that, you've crippled my product.

Let's examine that statement.
- You strongly push the purchase of a physical piece of media - which I no longer want. If I buy the movie/music in downloadable format, it's DRM protected so that it's almost unusable (eg. DRM servers ceasing to work, people being sued for making DRM "useable")
- You sue anyone, including people that don't own computers, grand mothers and little children. You subscribe to the mentality of "We will stop the beatings when morale improves" (ie. it's you at fault, not the MAFIAA or the archaic MAFIAA business models).
- You put messages on my DVDs and BluRays that I can't skip - they take a long time to sit through on every viewing of the movie. One of them is EXTREMELY insulting, implying that I am a CAR THIEF. Between calling my a CAR THIEF and suing anyone that you can, you re-enforce the message that you do not have respect for your customers - they are lowly thieves and not to be trusted. Your DRM re-inforces the "customers are thieves" message.

So in summary, you give me crap product, treat me like a criminal, sue me to re-enforce that i'm a criminal - and what do you expect? I'll tell you what you'll get. I tell EVERYONE to stop buying your product and I EDUCATE them on how to circumvent your archaic business model so you make no profit. If I am going to be treated this way - and you insist on assuming I'm a criminal, then you will get what you deserve.

Sincerely,
Joe Average

PS F*** the **AA

yuo fail 1t (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31490290)

But it is still blocked in Denmark. Workaround? (1)

viking80 (697716) | more than 4 years ago | (#31490390)

Took a weekend trip from Norway to Denmark, and to my surprise I got a big "STOP" screen when I visited pirate bay from the hotel wifi. The page had a reference to a judgment, and noted that my attempted violation of danish law and my IP address had *not* been recorded.

Not wanting to miss my favorite TV show, I changed my DNS to OpenDNS, then GoogleDNS, but still the same message. I expected this to be a simple DNS block, but they must have blocked off a segment of IP addresses. http://thejesperbay.dk/ [thejesperbay.dk] did not add any workable solution.

Does anyone know of a workaround for this? Seems like Chinese and Iranian people should be able to help me out here.

Good thing Norway is still open.

I'm a troll--so sue me. (0, Flamebait)

sbeckstead (555647) | more than 4 years ago | (#31490480)

I really love all the people that say they only pirate stuff 'cause the cost isn't reasonable. Yeah, if I'm broke and I need a loaf of bread then any price is unreasonable so I'm justified in stealing it. Screw you, pay the 2 bucks assholes. And to the guys that say that they wouldn't have been customers anyway so they are justified in taking it I don't get how that works either. If it costs more than you want to pay then you don't get to have it. Simple. If you wouldn't have bought it anyway then you still don't get to have it. it's really simple and I don't get why you can't grasp this concept.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?