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!

Danish Anti-Piracy Organization Bills P2P Users

michael posted more than 11 years ago | from the junk-mail dept.

News 682

faaaz writes "The danish anti-piracy organisation Antipiratgruppen has billed approximately 150 p2p users an amount of up to $14,000 each for sharing copyrighted material. The organisation says 'Pay up, or we'll sue!'" There's also a Reuters article.

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

FP (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4763021)

Forkity Porkity!

in other news.... (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4763022)

The slashdot editors still can't spell.

You mean, -1 Redundant? n/t (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4763073)

n/t

Awww Crud! (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4763024)

I thought P2P was supposed to be decentralized and less traceable? Hmmmmm?

Re:Awww Crud! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4763095)

If they put a server out there and you connect to it they got your IP address.

Re:Awww Crud! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4763144)

No, it could be but would be a lot slower in the process. When you actually come to get your file, you make a 1 on 1 connection with somebody else, this is very traceable indeed. After all they know your IP (to send the file to you) and they know what you asked to download.

I actually think it is a good thing. Piracy is still illegal no matter how much we may like it. I would also be pleased to see some of those people downloading child pornography get slammed and may some software to track their usage and IP's and pass them onto authorities for further investigation. I am sure there are many others monitoring the p2p networks right now.

Piracy is not a good thing.

If you want free music, make and support free music. If you want free software, make and support free software.

There is no need to resort to stealing.

Re:Awww Crud! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4763158)

No, it's less stoppable. If someone connects to you P2P, you can get their IP address. In most cases, if you can get their IP address, you can get them.

This is what projects like FreeNet are for. They hide who is requesting the file as well as who is sending it.

Who are they? (1, Insightful)

raydobbs (99133) | more than 11 years ago | (#4763026)

My question would be, "Who are they screw-heads, and why should I PAY them?!" Bills I don't remember instigating don't get paid. And let them sue me - they have to prove it.

Re:Who are they? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4763083)

This is what the problem is. If the claimer has a eg. screenshot of something shared it's the users responsebility to prove that it's NOT illigal. Something about the difference between civil and criminal court.

Re:Who are they? (1)

boomer_rehfield (579777) | more than 11 years ago | (#4763180)

No, they would have to prove that I don't have the CDs. (at least in the U.S.)

Re:Who are they? (1)

boomer_rehfield (579777) | more than 11 years ago | (#4763201)

guh...I was trying to reply to the message that has no score...not the main parent... *sigh*

Re:Who are they? (3, Interesting)

Alyeska (611286) | more than 11 years ago | (#4763167)

And let them sue me - they have to prove it.

Can't say I'm an expert on the Danes, but if this were the US, that's exactly what they'd be getting ready to do.

Since there was no purchase agreement between the "buyer" and "seller," the seller has to put a dollar value on the product by invoicing the "buyer." This way, they can take the cases to CIVIL court (suing for non-payment under much looser juries -- preponderance of evidence rules instead of reasonable doubt, etc., etc.) instead of waiting for the government to get involved with CRIMINAL charges.

I am an artist, and you WILL pay me. (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4763230)

I'm sorry, but the only reason I even bothered signing with a label was to SELL MY STUFF. Make money, that's all. I could care less about sharing my music. I write for me, no one else. I only allowed my songs to be recorded and pressed is because of the existence of copyright, and the ability to enforce it in a legal manner. If there were no such concept in this country, I wouldn't have even bothered with going into the business of selling intellectual property. I derive great personal enjoyment from writing and recording music. But when it comes to someone else wanting it, they better pay me. It's as simple as that. If you don't like it, kindly fuck off.

Now there are some that say my music isn't worth paying for. No problem, that's your opinion. Like I said before, I don't write to impress or please other people, I write to satisfy ME, MYSELF. Other people's opinions of my work is unimportant to me, I could really care less if you think my work is absolute dreck. But if you want a copy of it, you better fork out money. It's as simple as that.

1st (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4763033)

furst p0st

Well I guess they'd better pay up then. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4763034)

Ex-wife (5, Funny)

johnraphone (624518) | more than 11 years ago | (#4763035)

Sounds alot like my ex-wife.

FP from DK (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4763040)

First Post coming from Denmark!!!

sounds familiar... (1)

fishnuts (414425) | more than 11 years ago | (#4763047)

acting as if they own the PATENT on p2p or something.

Isn't this what Slashdot has always wanted? (5, Insightful)

targo (409974) | more than 11 years ago | (#4763049)

I mean, going after those who actually possess and distribute something that they have not legally purchased? Sounds legitimate to me.

Re:Isn't this what Slashdot has always wanted? (3, Interesting)

jmenezes (100986) | more than 11 years ago | (#4763106)

Yea but who are these guys?
is it M$ thats chraging the pirates?
is it adobe, or macromedia, or whatever company who's software is being distributed?
no.
its just some company who's supposedly against piracy, who is gonna make a profit off of piracy.
will adobe or M$ or anyone else see that money?
i highly doubt it.
all they are doing is basically going around and saying pay us, or pay us and some lawyer to protect your ass.

definately not what we've been asking for

Re:Isn't this what Slashdot has always wanted? (2)

fobbman (131816) | more than 11 years ago | (#4763187)

How do THEY know that the person hasn't legally purchased the CD? Do they register all CD purchases over there?

I don't like the idea of any anti-piracy group assuming that I'm guilty prior to a fair hearing by billing me.

Re:Isn't this what Slashdot has always wanted? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4763216)

The problem I have with it is, if they bill one for the product and they pay for it, then they should be able to keep using it.

Probably just a pittance (2, Insightful)

Noose For A Neck (610324) | more than 11 years ago | (#4763053)

Considering that P2P programs like KazAA and others allow people to share huge amounts of copyrighted material, I'm surprised that they are only charging around $14,000 each. The amount of lost sales caused by each user improving the "quality" of files on P2P networks alone and encouraging others to pirate must be phenominal.

If I were these guys, I'd consider myself getting away with a slap on the wrist.

Re:Probably just a pittance (1)

stratjakt (596332) | more than 11 years ago | (#4763127)

puh-lease.

The very fact that they charge each user 14,000 apiece means that these clowns have no way to measure or guage exactly how much piracy goes on, let alone what a single users portion of it would be.

It would be a far more legitimate campaign if they somehow tracked activity, and presented an itemized bill listing each and every provable download made by an individual.

It's a publicity stunt... Or extortion, if one could prove they actually believe anyone would pay the 14 Gs for fear of being sued.

Whoa... (5, Interesting)

c0dedude (587568) | more than 11 years ago | (#4763054)

If this organization isn't government sponsored, this sounds a lot like blackmail. I mean, pay or we'll sue? Who'll they have to go to? The big record companies, so pay up or we'll turn you over. And what guarantees does anyone have they won't turn around and sue anyway?

Re:Whoa... (-1)

ClickWir (166927) | more than 11 years ago | (#4763120)

Unfortunatly it's something that's being done similarly in USA with lawyers. Lawyers are a dime a dozen... they are bored. So they need new ways to make money. So they go hoof it for about a day and check out local businesses.

"Say Mister Shop Owner, I noticed some things about this building that aren't upto building code. $100 and we can say goodbye or I'll get the city in here and sue if need be. You can pay me a little now, or a lot later...?..."

"Alright, here's $150. We'll get on the repairs."

Re:Whoa... (2, Funny)

MSZ (26307) | more than 11 years ago | (#4763122)

And what guarantees does anyone have they won't turn around and sue anyway?

The "word of honor"? Ah I forgot, these are probably lawyers... can't expect that to work.

Who gets the money? (5, Insightful)

edashofy (265252) | more than 11 years ago | (#4763055)

Okay, so assuming this extorti...I mean apparently-legal action goes through, who gets the money? Is this anti-piracy group going to go out and distribute the monies to the appropriate copyright holders? Who decided what price to set for the various downloaded artifacts? Certainly there's a significant markup here.

Assuming a CD has, on average, 15 songs, and you can get a CD for $12 at Best Buy, $2.67--that's a 250% markup on each song.

And, who is going to ensure that paying these folks will prevent future prosecution by the copyright holders? Do I get to keep the songs and movies that I downloaded if I pay up?

Re:Who gets the money? (4, Informative)

C0deM0nkey (203681) | more than 11 years ago | (#4763125)

Do I get to keep the songs and movies that I downloaded if I pay up?

No.

From the article:

"If they pay now - and delete the illegal content from their hard drives - then the amount is cut in half and they avoid going to court. Those who don't pay up are to be sued."

Re:Who gets the money? (-1)

ClickWir (166927) | more than 11 years ago | (#4763159)

That's why here in America, what they are doing is illegal. It's blackmail basically. "Pay me a little now or a lot later. What? You want some reassurance that we won't come sue you later? OK, Jimmy... see Jimmy's shotgun... you pay us now and we won't kill you. Is that a better deal?"

Either way, it's illegal.

Re:Who gets the money? (1, Troll)

unicron (20286) | more than 11 years ago | (#4763213)

See what happens when you try to think off the medication?

Re:Who gets the money? (0)

ModernGeek (601932) | more than 11 years ago | (#4763228)

It says in the article they have to pay up AND delete the files, so I assume they do not get to keep the content.

Well.. (5, Interesting)

dj28 (212815) | more than 11 years ago | (#4763057)

This is exactly what the majority of slashdotters have been screaming for. Go after the abusers rather than the technology. It'll be interesting to see what the comments on this thread will be like. Let this hypocrisy begin... now.

it's not hypocrisy (2, Interesting)

kilonad (157396) | more than 11 years ago | (#4763163)

It's not hypocrisy in this case. If the Danish RIAA were going after the users themselves, that's fine. But what's going on here would be like the BSA (business software alliance, not boy scouts) going after some pirates, saying "pay up or we'll sue" but never really saying what they'll do with that money, and charging the pirates $500 for each copy of windows downloaded and $1500 for each copy of ms office.

That having been said, I do enjoy watching slashdotters squirm in their pants when accused of hipocrisy. ;)

Re:Well.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4763184)

I wouldn't call it hypocrisy. Their dissatisfaction just proves that no matter how governments, big business, technologists and users approach the issue of copyright and piracy, someone will always get horribly shafted. In this particular instance, it looks like the victims are both the users and the copyright holders (if they don't get payoff from the anti piracy group).

I think it's important to realize that there is no way to solve this issue of piracy in a way that everyone will agree on. Musicians want to get paid what they deserve for their works, labels want to get their enormous cut, users (ideally) want everything for free, and lawmakers will go with whoever offers them the most money.

But don't worry, it's always been this way to some extent.

Re:Well.. (5, Insightful)

Jugalator (259273) | more than 11 years ago | (#4763235)

Yeah, we've all been screaming for random organizations being able to force ISP's to do what only the police use to have the power to - make them publicize their customer information. Yes, "force", since this is never done willingly by the ISP's since it gives them very bad PR when the average user find out that they tend to give away their customer info like that.

My problem is that I don't see how they suddenly got this power without having the police involved.

Also, as The Register mentions, this can surely backfire:

"Also, the labels, movie studios and video game makers have increasingly distributed bogus files on P2P networks that resemble the genuine article, down to file size and title, to frustrate would-be downloaders."

From the antipiracy bureaus, I hope for their own sake that they brought CRC checksums of each file with them and that they can connect those to the actual transfer of the p2p user.

Sad day ... Stephen King dead at 55 (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4763060)


I just heard some sad news on talk radio - Horror/Sci Fi writer Stephen King was found dead in his Maine home this morning. There weren't any more details. I'm sure everyone in the Slashdot community will miss him - even if you didn't enjoy his work, there's no denying his contributions to popular culture. Truly an American icon.

Why stephen king? (2)

Unknown Poltroon (31628) | more than 11 years ago | (#4763168)

Could you pick another name?

Re:Sad day ... Stephen King dead at 55 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4763198)

Oh my God!
They killed Stephen!

People are finally starting to "get it" (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4763061)

When I watch Buchanan and Press, and see Press describe mp3 as no bigger a crime than not stopping at a stop sign, I realize it's finally beginning to hit the public at how much power RIAA is getting. People are getting sick of it, and if RIAA doesn't watch it, they'll find a lot of young people taking office and changing laws.

Yay! (1)

CableModemSniper (556285) | more than 11 years ago | (#4763068)

They are actually going after individuals who pirate copywritten material instead of trying to destroy the system itself. Go Danes! Although $14k kinda sucks.

Re:Yay! (2, Insightful)

Karamchand (607798) | more than 11 years ago | (#4763133)

Ok, now think about for example Kazaa without all those evil pirates. Guess what - this cool technology wouldn't exist and wouldn't be used without them.

Lol ... (2, Flamebait)

SuperDuG (134989) | more than 11 years ago | (#4763069)

Okay ummm I would just respond simply to this bill

BRING IT

Where's my services rendered, where's my product delivered, and where's the sales agreement which was signed that justifies you billing me?

They've got a term for this in America, we here like to call it extortion.

Re:Lol ... (3, Informative)

Loki_1929 (550940) | more than 11 years ago | (#4763123)

Settlments in lieu of lawsuits are quite common and perfectly legal in the US, and most other countries I'd suspect.

Re:Lol ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4763186)

where's the sales agreement which was signed that justifies you downloading their copyrighted works?

there is a term for this in America - theft.

it amazes me how people can be breaking the law, and stealing software and music, and still have the nerve to act all self righteous!

haha (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4763072)

Put that in your pipe and smoke it you snobby euro fuckers.

Isn't this called... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4763076)

Blackmail?

Getting out of hand (1, Interesting)

megagurka (108291) | more than 11 years ago | (#4763080)

Seems like the anti piracy groups are getting desperate and taking the law in their own hands. I hope some of these cases get to court, and that they lose big. That will put an end to this stupidity...

Think before you post... (5, Insightful)

mattypants (169026) | more than 11 years ago | (#4763081)

Before any of you americans start quoting your constitution, please remember that this is Denmark and the law is different there. Why not wait and see what happens first, eh?

Re:Think before you post... (-1)

ClickWir (166927) | more than 11 years ago | (#4763192)

Four score and seven years ago our fathers brought forth on this continent, a new nation... fuck denmark and the high horse they think they are.

Idea... (2, Troll)

Loki_1929 (550940) | more than 11 years ago | (#4763082)

Maybe it would be a good idea for them to sell the content they've downloaded on eBay [ebay.com] to raise funds for paying the bills or hiring a lawyer... Yeah, I'm sure that'd solve all their problems.

Antipirategruppen Rommel (1)

Utini420 (444935) | more than 11 years ago | (#4763087)

I wonder what kind of tanks an Antipiratgruppen uses in the field. If properly supported by infantry and dive bombers, this blitzkrieg thing might just work...

You ignorant turd (0)

mattypants (169026) | more than 11 years ago | (#4763174)

It's Denmark, stupid. And don't be so rude about the Germans - a far more polite people than the americans.

See my previous posts regarding your capital 'A'.

This is dangerous (5, Insightful)

GreyWolf3000 (468618) | more than 11 years ago | (#4763088)

This may set a precedent for allowing big companies to define something as "stealing" and then send a bill. Consider a bill coming from mail.com for blocking their pop-up ads, or from the Cable TV company for not watching commercials (they DO know when you change channels and for how long).

How 'bout I send a bill to Kazaa for 'stealing' information about me that is used to provide ads that bother the shit about me? Oh wait, I can't threaten them with legal action like they can.

Re:This is dangerous (5, Insightful)

dj28 (212815) | more than 11 years ago | (#4763191)

What? That's how the legal system works. You don't have to pay the bill. You have a choice of either paying the bill for the music you are accused of pirating, or you can take it to court and make them prove that you pirated it. This is no different than a company or individual accusing you of vandalizing property, and then sending you a bill for the damages with a letter attached saying, "Pay up, or we'll sue."

Re:This is dangerous (ignore it!) (1)

dagg (153577) | more than 11 years ago | (#4763221)

You can simply ignore it. There is no legal reason why you should pay it. But. They will likely sue you if you don't pay. And then you may be compelled to legally pay them money.

--
Sex of you [tilegarden.com]

Body of article (2, Informative)

magiluke (629097) | more than 11 years ago | (#4763089)

By Bernhard Warner, Reuters, 11/26/02

LONDON -- In a unique crackdown on illegal file-sharing, a Danish anti-piracy group mailed invoices to alleged pirates demanding compensation for downloading copyrighted materials off the Internet, an attorney for the group said on Tuesday.

The Danish Anti Piracy Group (APG) identified 150 alleged pirates asking them to pay a combined $133,600, said Morten Lindegaard, an attorney for the group. The biggest offenders face a bill of $13,360.

"We are demanding full payment for the use of these copyrighted materials," Lindegaard said. The APG has worked with the Danish branch of music trade body International Federation of the Phonographic Industry, to crack down on online piracy. The decision to seek compensation for downloads opens up a controversial new front in copyright holders' ongoing campaign to curb consumer piracy on the Internet, a phenomenon blamed for a decline in CD sales and upswing in the free trade of video games, computer software and video games.

The tactic is drawing protests from some technical and legal experts who insist that without the violators' computer it's impossible to prove the existence of copyright violations. Others question the size of the bills.

"In this case, we're talking about compensation for the damage the Anti Piracy Group claims its members have suffered. It's the courts that decide the amount of compensation to be paid due to copyright infringement, not the victim." said Martin von Haller Groenbaek, a Danish attorney specialising in IT law.

KAZAA, EDONKEY USERS TARGETED

In each case, the Danish users were accused of downloading copyrighted materials from file-sharing networks Kazaa and eDonkey, two popular so-called peer-to-peer (P2P) networks in Denmark, Lindegaard said.

Lindegaard, 29, and his helpers -- four Danish university students -- developed a software program that monitored Danish file swappers on the two P2P networks, honing down to the users' Internet Protocol, or IP, address to confirm they were logged on from Denmark.

The program also traced the files shared and the time at which they were downloaded. After reviewing the evidence, a judge ordered the users' Internet service providers to pass on the violators' billing addresses.

In each case, the alleged pirate first learned they were being investigated when they received a bill in the post, which began arriving late last week.

A spokesman for the Danish Consumer Council said they received roughly 50 complaints from the fined individuals. After an initial investigation, the council determined the APG complied with local data protection laws, the spokesman added.

STUDENTS, PROFESSIONALS FINGERED

Lindegaard said the accused range from high school students to professionals. They downloaded materials ranging from Eminem songs to the latest Star Wars film to the video game, "Grand Theft Auto."

"The top 10 computer games, music and movies -- it's all there," said Lindegaard.

The alleged pirates were billed based on the amount of files they shared. For a single music file, they were charged $2.67; $26.70 for a movie and approximately $50 for a video game, Lindegaard said. But technical experts threw into question the fairness of the bill, pointing to the fact that copyrighted material from time to time is distributed for free across the Internet in a legitimate manner.

For example, major record labels allow users to download select songs from new album releases off the Web. The tracks typically expire after a period, but in some cases the deactivated track may still appear on a users' hard drive.

Also, the labels, movie studios and video game makers have increasingly distributed bogus files on P2P networks that resemble the genuine article, down to file size and title, to frustrate would-be downloaders.

"How do you know each of these copyrighted materials is illegal? That's the big issue here," said Urs Gattiker, a professor of technology and innovation management at Aalborg University in Denmark.

Moderators: Parent= -1 Redundant (1)

ectoraige (123390) | more than 11 years ago | (#4763231)

Not +1 Insightful.

The Reg isn't about to be slashdotted, nor is bostom.com. Posting the text of a link is just wasteful, and makes my reading time slower.

I will of course lose karma now, but at least I didn't +1 myself.

And the money goes to... (2, Insightful)

MSZ (26307) | more than 11 years ago | (#4763091)

...not the artists. Why should they get any? Like in Napster case...

Also it's interesting as the people in The Register note, that proving, even with the lower standard of civil action, that particular user had real movies or who exactly set up p2p on particular computer might be a little problematic.

Looks like a scare tactics to me.

Moral ? (1)

Maxime Lefrancois (627966) | more than 11 years ago | (#4763093)

They pay for everyone else, I guess, although I would like to see the names of those poor souls ... I have my doubts.

Well at least... (5, Funny)

blenderfish (156901) | more than 11 years ago | (#4763096)

...now we know what Step 2 is.

Step 3: Profit!

Re:Well at least... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4763173)

We have known for weeks. Step 2 is ...

How do the Danish know ... (3, Insightful)

Rev.LoveJoy (136856) | more than 11 years ago | (#4763097)

That these users do not already own the material on the up and up?

The article says that they are billing by file name. This method has its own, shall we say, limitations. I would imagine it would be embarrasing to take the p2p users to court only to have them show up with recitps for the material the rightly own.

Cheers,
-- RLJ

Re:How do the Danish know ... (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Cowtard (573891) | more than 11 years ago | (#4763126)

Sure, I may have purchased some CD lately (say, Bob Dylan's latest), but the act of purchasing it does not give me the right to share the MP3s I rip from it with the world via a P2P program.

Sure, there's the people who will respond with "Well, I can make a copy for a friend or my spouse can't I?" I suppose, but that sort of copying isn't near of the scale of distribution that offering your MP3s on Kazaa gives you.

In case the Reuters Story is Slashdotted (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4763099)

LONDON In a unique crackdown on illegal file-sharing, a Danish anti-piracy group mailed invoices to alleged pirates demanding compensation for downloading copyrighted materials off the Internet, an attorney for the group said on Tuesday.

The Danish Anti Piracy Group (APG) identified 150 alleged pirates asking them to pay a combined $133,600, said Morten Lindegaard, an attorney for the group. The biggest offenders face a bill of $13,360.

"We are demanding full payment for the use of these copyrighted materials," Lindegaard said. The APG has worked with the Danish branch of music trade body International Federation of the Phonographic Industry, to crack down on online piracy. The decision to seek compensation for downloads opens up a controversial new front in copyright holders' ongoing campaign to curb consumer piracy on the Internet, a phenomenon blamed for a decline in CD sales and upswing in the free trade of video games, computer software and video games.

The tactic is drawing protests from some technical and legal experts who insist that without the violators' computer it's impossible to prove the existence of copyright violations. Others question the size of the bills.

"In this case, we're talking about compensation for the damage the Anti Piracy Group claims its members have suffered. It's the courts that decide the amount of compensation to be paid due to copyright infringement, not the victim." said Martin von Haller Groenbaek, a Danish attorney specialising in IT law.

KAZAA, EDONKEY USERS TARGETED

In each case, the Danish users were accused of downloading copyrighted materials from file-sharing networks Kazaa and eDonkey, two popular so-called peer-to-peer (P2P) networks in Denmark, Lindegaard said.

Lindegaard, 29, and his helpers -- four Danish university students -- developed a software program that monitored Danish file swappers on the two P2P networks, honing down to the users' Internet Protocol, or IP, address to confirm they were logged on from Denmark.

The program also traced the files shared and the time at which they were downloaded. After reviewing the evidence, a judge ordered the users' Internet service providers to pass on the violators' billing addresses.

In each case, the alleged pirate first learned they were being investigated when they received a bill in the post, which began arriving late last week.

A spokesman for the Danish Consumer Council said they received roughly 50 complaints from the fined individuals. After an initial investigation, the council determined the APG complied with local data protection laws, the spokesman added.

STUDENTS, PROFESSIONALS FINGERED

Lindegaard said the accused range from high school students to professionals. They downloaded materials ranging from Eminem songs to the latest Star Wars film to the video game, "Grand Theft Auto."

"The top 10 computer games, music and movies -- it's all there," said Lindegaard.

The alleged pirates were billed based on the amount of files they shared. For a single music file, they were charged $2.67; $26.70 for a movie and approximately $50 for a video game, Lindegaard said. But technical experts threw into question the fairness of the bill, pointing to the fact that copyrighted material from time to time is distributed for free across the Internet in a legitimate manner.

For example, major record labels allow users to download select songs from new album releases off the Web. The tracks typically expire after a period, but in some cases the deactivated track may still appear on a users' hard drive.

Also, the labels, movie studios and video game makers have increasingly distributed bogus files on P2P networks that resemble the genuine article, down to file size and title, to frustrate would-be downloaders.

"How do you know each of these copyrighted materials is illegal? That's the big issue here," said Urs Gattiker, a professor of technology and innovation management at Aalborg University in Denmark.

Sharing or downloading? (2)

Karamchand (607798) | more than 11 years ago | (#4763101)

The article on theregister says they have to pay for "illegally downloading copyright material". The article on slashdot says "for sharing copyrighted material". The article on reuters says also for downloading material.

So what?! Why put funny things in the slashdot article?!

Who's copyrights? (2, Interesting)

pknoll (215959) | more than 11 years ago | (#4763102)

I'm assuming Antipiratgruppen are the copyright holders, or acting on their legal behalf. Right?

Otherwise their actions are about as threatening as the BSA's. Right?

What about legit material? (1)

Hi_2k (567317) | more than 11 years ago | (#4763103)

I have about 20 cd's on my hard drive. I own all of them, as well as all but one of the movies I have. So who's gonna say that I have to pay rediculous fee's for them? It'd be cheaper to buy the cd's, making all the content completley legit, and if the fu^H^H^H morons at the RIAA want to sue me they can sure as hell try. It is NOT, repeat NOT illeagal to have copies of stuff you OWN in any civilised nation, and if it is over there, they should move.

What's it worth? (2)

Yoda2 (522522) | more than 11 years ago | (#4763104)

$16 per CD and about $60 per full length movie How much for each p0rn JPG?

screen shots != great proof (2, Insightful)

xintegerx (557455) | more than 11 years ago | (#4763107)

1) the evidence used are screen shots (can be faked)
2) the file names could be misleading (i.e., the file's contents not illegal)
3) which family member used the computer?

Basically, they are saying pay us $60 bucks. Otherwise, they will take you to court.

However, if they take you to court, you might win!

This is like me sending random letters asking to be PayPal'd or expect to see me in court! If people comply... well then thanks!

Which by the way would be like holding people up for ransom?

Maybe this story [slashdot.org] affected the Danishes, eh?

Re:screen shots != great proof (5, Informative)

Loki_1929 (550940) | more than 11 years ago | (#4763165)

"3) which family member used the computer?"

This isn't like a motor vehicle; the person who owns the ISP account is responsible for how it's used. This is why a company can be liable for its employees' copyright infringment.

now (2)

Unknown Poltroon (31628) | more than 11 years ago | (#4763110)

Can they go after me for merely having this stuff availbe on my computer, or do they have to go after the people who have downloaded it? If im plying my car stereo and someone comes by and makes a tape of it, its not my fault, is it?

SaveKaryn... (1, Offtopic)

edashofy (265252) | more than 11 years ago | (#4763111)

Hey, remember SaveKaryn? Well, I guess it's time for the /. crowd to set up:

http://www.saveapoordanishpir8.org/

My Money: $320
Your Money: $524.53
Ebay Sales of Breakfast Pastries: $2.25

Remaining total: $12,348.23

How would they prove this? (3, Interesting)

Cipster (623378) | more than 11 years ago | (#4763113)

Unless they had actual physical proof that the file in question was the copyrighted material I cannot see how they could sue them. Screenshots are a joke (give me 30 min and Photoshop and I could make a credible screenie of Kazaa with anything I would want on it). Also all they have is a file name on the screen. Just because it's labeled Adobe Photoshop it is not necessarily that (the amount of mislabeled stuff on p2p is pretty signinficant).

And then it becomes legitimate (2)

gorf (182301) | more than 11 years ago | (#4763114)

So, if someone pays the bills, he can then legally digitally own everything he got billed for! With no EULAs in sight, presumably.

Re:And then it becomes legitimate (1)

C0deM0nkey (203681) | more than 11 years ago | (#4763193)

Read The Register's article -- the fee is a FINE -- you are supposed to delete the content after paying the fine.

what if..... (5, Informative)

ejaw5 (570071) | more than 11 years ago | (#4763117)

In the instructions made to install Kazaa (Full)without adware (cydoor, et al), one of the things to do was to delete the ~/KaZaa/db folder and replace that with a dummy file by opening notepad and saving a blank file as "db" (no extention). As a result of this, all downloaded files in (~/Kazaa/My Shared Files) would appear to have "failed" in Kazaa, and the downloaded files would remain in their *.dat files. It would also NOT include them in your list of files shared. You'd then have to rename the files with extentsions before exiting Kazaa or else you'd lose them.

So...if you want to download on P2P you could probably take these measures and be okay

Its a good thing for Antipiratgruppen ..... (1)

bizitch (546406) | more than 11 years ago | (#4763124)

that nobody in Denmark has claimed the Intellectual Property rights for being stupid ....

Oh - wait a minute ...

foockem (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4763129)

Tell em to foocking SUE me.

Ill counter sue for selling defective software. (Microsoft should be scared of that class action lawsuit!!!)

Antipiratgruppen (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4763135)

I knew my love for Danish porn would come back to bite me in the ass.

What proof? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4763145)

Apparently, Anti Pirat Gruppen [sic] has violated privacy laws by collecting and storing such information. They may be forced to delete a lot of information.

I'd love to see them stand in court with no logs, no names, no nothing.

Alternative to sharing copyright materials (-1, Offtopic)

NakedShavedPussyGuy (628948) | more than 11 years ago | (#4763149)

P2P users should share more pictures of naked, shaved pussy [virtually.net] instead.

can't pay the fine, don't do the crime (1)

eht (8912) | more than 11 years ago | (#4763151)

just because you think you have the right to take something because information wants to be free, don't be surprised when people come knocking, look at the people who uncapped their cable modems or the cracking ring that got busted a little while ago, of course i would *never* use something i didn't pay for

Bullshit evidence so far (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4763153)

"APG monitored the file sharing networks for available files with Danish IP addresses - and went to court to get the users' personal details from their ISPs, armed with screen shots of, for example, the KaZaA window showing the files on the user's hard-drive."

So if I go out wearing a shirt that says "I'm a murderer, please arrest me" am I going to go to jail too?

Those knuckleheads .... (1)

bizitch (546406) | more than 11 years ago | (#4763155)

Those p2p users should have formed the
Weuseanonymousproxyandcanpiratallwewantgruppen

Pay to play (0)

Dolphy (569457) | more than 11 years ago | (#4763157)

Well, if Danish court systems are anything like that of the United States, I would be willing to wager that a large percentage of people will pay the bill...just to avoid the cost, time, and red tape of the lawyers and associated annoyances. This kind of reaction could lead to a self-righteous anti-piracy group getting bloated results to their demands, and thereby stepping up their activity...not to mention the precedent which will be set for groups to follow.

Big Deal.. (0, Troll)

alexjohns (53323) | more than 11 years ago | (#4763160)

This is in Denmark. There's nothing of any concern to us Americans. We live in a free country, remember. No way anything like that will have any effect over here. We're protected by that Bill of Rights thing.

Even if this was the beginning of something, Denmark is like, really small, right? It would probably only take one nuke to clean their clock.

BTW, have we started kicking Iraqi ass yet? Gas prices are way high, here. They need to start coming down soon. I'm itching for a cross-country road trip in my new H2. It'll be sweet when we own all that oil. 10 cents a freakin' gallon, man.

(Note: The above was sarcasm. A little bit of irony, too. FTHI.)

Tough situation (3, Insightful)

mao che minh (611166) | more than 11 years ago | (#4763161)

The names of the files can be rather incriminating, since it isn't likely that a file named "U2-Sunday Bloody Sunday.mp3" is anything but that song, by that artist. Coupled with the fact that these users probably have hundreds of similarly named files, it won't be easy to dissuade a jury of your peers that you were not illegally obtaining copy righted music. Yet, with this being the only evidence that they have to go by, a defending lawyer might be able to prove that there is reasonable doubt - especially if the files are no longer present on the culprits system at the time of a law enforcemnet raid (if that ever happens over there).

The most obvious answer is to stop pirating. A person can come up with all of the self serving rationalizations that they want, like "I wasn't going to ever pay for it anways" or "the industry charges too much", but in the end, you obtained material that is explicitly protected and must be obtained through a legitimate sale in an illegal manner. Pay up.

Re:Tough situation (2)

gorf (182301) | more than 11 years ago | (#4763209)

The names of the files can be rather incriminating, since it isn't likely that a file named "U2-Sunday Bloody Sunday.mp3" is anything but that song, by that artist.

Probably, yes. But if the prosecuters are the same people who are trying to exasperate filesharing attempts by putting fake files out in the wild (correct name and size), then a defendant might have a good point demanding evidence that the file actually does contain the song.

The most obvious answer is to stop pirating...must be obtained through a legitimate sale in an illegal manner. Pay up.

Just because something is illegal does not mean that it's wrong. Not that I'm making any comment on any particular case or law, but it isn't as straightforward as that. Yes, said defendant will end up with a court order to pay up, but he is perfectly entitled to whine about it being unfair (this depends on his opinion about the law, of course; being a hypocrite is no excuse).

Ridiculous.. (3, Interesting)

xchino (591175) | more than 11 years ago | (#4763175)

This is completely ridiculous. If any of the victims of this fold and just pay, shame on them. IINAL, esp not a danish one, so I don't know how the court systems work over there, but I have a feeling this same case in America would be thrown out of court. Unless they can explicitly prove they were sharing data with users who did not already have a license to the data (which should be protected under Fair Use). And unless they have subpoeniad the receivers of said data, they have no case at all. However if I had been one of the victims of this suit, I think it would have caused me severe emotional distress, and slandered my good name. At least that's what my counter suit
would claim.

Like these people dont earn enough money. (0)

skybuck (582727) | more than 11 years ago | (#4763183)

It think it's ridicolous. What are they going to do next ? Sue people for listening to radio ? Like music artists don't make enough money hahaha. What... the need more money for their 11th rolls royce and another one for their dog ? Ofcourse they need more money to buy their 50th house :) Get real people, enough is enough.

Blank mp3s (5, Funny)

Zemran (3101) | more than 11 years ago | (#4763185)

I think this is the most brilliant piece of marketting yet. First they jam up P2P with blank mp3s to put people off using P2P and then they send those people a bill for accepting the blank mp3. $10 for a loop of nothing?

Do they have a copyright on the blank loop? If not I think I should hurry up and copyright it :)

Good on them! (5, Interesting)

Noose For A Neck (610324) | more than 11 years ago | (#4763190)

I'm glad to see that somebody out there is going to punish the P2P abusers. Pirates are giving P2P a bad name.

For example, I'm in a small, unsigned punk band. We distribute our music over P2P because it is a lot cheaper than getting webspace to host stuff and paying for bandwidth. But right now, we have to compete with all these ultra-shitty, ultra-popular bands like Metallica and Jon Bon Jovi for the eyes and ears of P2P users. On top of that, it gives us a bad name. People look at me funny when I say we distribute our music on KaZaA, like I'm some kind of criminal.

When we clean out the abusers and criminals from P2P and let the real people, the small-time, unsigned artists, get exposure, then we will have won. And I won't shed a single tear for these people who are fucking it up for the rest of us.

I didn't do it (1)

koh-der (597436) | more than 11 years ago | (#4763197)

Was running windoz and got hacked. since reformatted. :)

If they pay (2)

hrieke (126185) | more than 11 years ago | (#4763200)

do they get to keep their downloads or is this like a fine that one pays to a court?

Good! (2)

afidel (530433) | more than 11 years ago | (#4763207)

Keep copyright law where it should be, a civil matter. Why the heck the goverment thinks copyright protection should be worthy of arrest let alone jail time is beyond me. In most cases copyright infringement is just that infringment on someones rights as sole distributer, not theft, as there is no loss of goods to the victim. This strikes me as being the appropriate response to the matter.

Advice to edonkey (or emule) users (2)

Cryogenes (324121) | more than 11 years ago | (#4763208)

eMule (the Free successor to edonkey) makes very efficient use of the bandwith donated by its users. Even if I share only a single moderately popular file (e.g. an Ally McBeal episode) my upload pipe tends to be maxxed out. Therefore, a user who shares one file contributes just as much as a user who shares a thousand . In fact, even more, because he generates less overhead.

You should therefore radically reduce the number of files you share. The ideal situation is a net with ten million users each of which host exactly one file (popular files get hosted by more nodes than rare ones, of course). Let the RIAA deal with that!

Do you believe in death after life?

Shortsighted quick readers should not post (5, Insightful)

Drestin (82768) | more than 11 years ago | (#4763214)

Ahh... the hipocracy begins to spue. I thought that P2P had legitimate purposes and that all the legitimate users would love it if the nasty abusers doing illegals things were punished and removed so that nothing would soil the pure clean image of P@P for ... um... legit uses, if we can think of some.

BUT, putting that aside. Some points:

Too all those "They can't make me pay cause I didn't sign anything" or "Go ahead, sue me for not paying the bill.": You guys missed the point. This bill is an option. They are being nice to you. They are saying; OK, look, you're busted and, deep inside, you know you are busted. We are giving you a chance to avoid court and make this go away as if you were legit. Just pay this bill and you won't go to court. Oh, don't agree? Want to deny it? Won't pay? Fine. We'll take you to court. Oh... NOT for not paying this bill. You are right, you didn't sign or receive a service for THIS bill. Nope, we're taking you to court for the copyrighted material you have stole and are redistributing.

Too all the photoshop wannabe's with this: we could fake those screenshots. Do you honestly (stupidly) think that all they have are some dot-matrix printouts of some screen dumps? Think people. They probably had notarized witnesses present while capturing the data, or cops or the equivilent - for one. And they probably DID download the files from your computer and categloged them neatly with the IP your ISP DHCPed to you along with the records from the ISP where you dialed up from or which IP they gave to what MAC address on who's cable modem or what IP went to what DSL caller.

People - listen. This is not a troll or flamebait. Remember something
If you are not doing anything illegal - you have nothing to worry about!

Obviously legal users of P2P networks aren't concerned, they are happy. All those bandwidth hogs trading illegal stuff are being forced off. This is a GOOD thing remember? You have said you actually want this right? How could you possibly complain?

Before replying, think: only the thieves have anything to worry about - and you aren't a theif are you?

They should be called... (1)

girish (19258) | more than 11 years ago | (#4763217)

The Danish Ass Pirat Gruppen...

That's gonna make for some pissed off parents... (2)

Yo Grark (465041) | more than 11 years ago | (#4763219)

What is the legal right of a 13 year old?

Are they holding the Parents of minors accountable?

Are they providing cushions for the all the smacked asses they have caused?

Yo Grark
Canadian Bred with American Buttering
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?