Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

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

Thank you!

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

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

cancel ×

454 comments

Not related to copyright (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11353634)

Rather, they prosecute bad taste in Hong Kong.

THEY SHOULD CANE THAT MOTHERFUCKER!! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11353734)

*_g_o_a_t_s_e_x_*_g_o_a_t_s_e_x_*_g_o_a_t_s_e_x_*_
g_______________________________________________g_ _
o_/_____\_____________\____________/____\_______o_ _
a|_______|_____________\__________|______|______a_ _
t|_______`._____________|_________|_______:_____t_ _
s`________|_____________|________\|_______|_____s_ _
e_\_______|_/_______/__\\\___--___\\_______:____e_ _
x__\______\/____--~~__________~--__|_\_____|____x_ _
*___\______\_-~____________________~-_\____|____*_ _
g____\______\_________.--------.______\|___|____g_ _
o______\_____\______//_________(_(__>__\___|____o_ _
a_______\___.__C____)_________(_(____>__|__/____a_ _
t_______/\_|___C_____)/INSERT\_(_____>__|_/_____t_ _
s______/_/\|___C_____)__CANE_|__(___>___/__\____s_ _
e_____|___(____C_____)\_HERE_/__//__/_/_____\___e_ _
x_____|____\__|_____\\_________//_(__/_______|__x_ _
*____|_\____\____)___`----___--'_____________|__*_ _
g____|__\______________\_______/____________/_|_g_ _
o___|______________/____|_____|__\____________|_o_ _
a___|_____________|____/_______\__\___________|_a_ _
t___|__________/_/____|_________|__\___________|t_ _
s___|_________/_/______\__/\___/____|__________|s_ _
e__|_________/_/________|____|_______|_________|e_ _
x__|__________|_________|____|_______|_________|x_ _
*_g_o_a_t_s_e_x_*_g_o_a_t_s_e_x_*_g_o_a_t_s_e_x_*_


Important Stuff: Please try to keep posts on topic. Try to reply to other people's comments instead of starting new threads. Read other people's messages before posting your own to avoid simply duplicating what has already been said. Use a clear subject that describes what your message is about. Offtopic, Inflammatory, Inappropriate, Illegal, or Offensive comments might be moderated. (You can read everything, even moderated posts, by adjusting your threshold on the User Preferences Page) If you want replies to your comments sent to you, consider logging in or creating an account.

Important Stuff: Please try to keep posts on topic. Try to reply to other people's comments instead of starting new threads. Read other people's messages before posting your own to avoid simply duplicating what has already been said. Use a clear subject that describes what your message is about. Offtopic, Inflammatory, Inappropriate, Illegal, or Offensive comments might be moderated. (You can read everything, even moderated posts, by adjusting your threshold on the User Preferences Page) If you want replies to your comments sent to you, consider logging in or creating an account.

Important Stuff: Please try to keep posts on topic. Try to reply to other people's comments instead of starting new threads. Read other people's messages before posting your own to avoid simply duplicating what has already been said. Use a clear subject that describes what your message is about. Offtopic, Inflammatory, Inappropriate, Illegal, or Offensive comments might be moderated. (You can read everything, even moderated posts, by adjusting your threshold on the User Preferences Page) If you want replies to your comments sent to you, consider logging in or creating an account.

Re:Not related to copyright (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11353743)

... however, the judge may throw out the case, according to the recently passed "Jennifer Garner Hotness" clause. The clause would also cover "13 Going on 30" and "Elektra" uploads.

She's not hot (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11353760)

You've been brainwashed by the media and their use of small outfits.

Re:Not related to copyright (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11353874)

Umm no, I'm pretty sure that she'd be hot in big outfits too. Thanks though.

Re:Not related to copyright (1)

eln (21727) | more than 9 years ago | (#11353745)

The really sad part will be when he gets out of prison and goes to view the movies he "paid for" and finds out that they're really mislabelled gay porn.

Although, given the movies he was downloading, that might actually work out better for him, especially after all that time in prison.

Re:Not related to copyright (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11353768)

Don't pirates learn? Always trade Renault, and Godard and Rohmer. None of this Miss Congeniality by God knows who malarkey.

Why not encrypt these downloads? (1)

FyRE666 (263011) | more than 9 years ago | (#11353914)

Surely public key encryption could be built into the p2p clients so that at least there could only be proof that a client shared a single file. Any third party monitoring the network would only see digital static moving between nodes...

Something's not right (1)

loid_void (740416) | more than 9 years ago | (#11353639)

"Daredevil,""Red Planet" and "Miss Congeniality

Hmm... There's more to this story that they're not telling... and, yes, if it was me, I would not want to be identified.

Re:Something's not right (1)

ackthpt (218170) | more than 9 years ago | (#11353686)

Hmm... There's more to this story that they're not telling... and, yes, if it was me, I would not want to be identified.

They were the Good Taste Police, led by Politenessman

great (1)

durtbag (694991) | more than 9 years ago | (#11353643)

so it begins.....

Re:great (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11353813)

there is a hole in your mind

Is proof even necessary? (1)

KingFatty (770719) | more than 9 years ago | (#11353824)

How are they going to prove he "distributed" the movie if he is only serving chunks out piecemeal to various clients?

I mean, can they track other users, to see how many full downloads were obtained only from this guy?

Serving a small slice of the movie is not distributing the movie because THAT SLICE is useless without all the pieces. If he was serving the movie, all they can prove is they *they* were able to download one copy of it (per machine/instance they were able to download). Right?

Re:Is proof even necessary? (3, Informative)

Macadamizer (194404) | more than 9 years ago | (#11353890)

"How are they going to prove he "distributed" the movie if he is only serving chunks out piecemeal to various clients?"

Under U.S. copyright law, you don't have to actually prove that distribution occured -- it is generally sufficient to make a copyrighted work available for distribution. You don't have to prove that anyone downloaded the file -- simply making it available on Kazaa or whatever is sufficient. There's a case on this, Playboy v. Chuckleberry or Playbou v. Harbough, or one of the Playboy v. someone cases that raised this point.

Re:great (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11353831)

...and so it should. You don't get to break the rules when programming. Why should you get to break them in real life?

The man wasn't arrested for using BitTorrent, or for using the Internet, or for using his computer, or for having an opinion, or for speaking out. He was arrested for committing a crime which he knew to be a crime. This is as it should be.

he was also given a $200 fine (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11353646)

...for bad taste!

Wow! (0, Troll)

sinclair44 (728189) | more than 9 years ago | (#11353649)

It's a YRO article that actually deals with rights online!

Re:Wow! (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11353675)

Bull.

My rights are not affected by the prosecution of some pirate. We don't have, nor should we expect, the right to pirate movies.

Re:Wow! (2, Insightful)

stupidfoo (836212) | more than 9 years ago | (#11353763)

Uh oh. Be careful! That statement goes against the slashbot groupthink!

Re:Wow! (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11353791)

Uh oh. Be careful! That statement goes against the slashbot groupthink!

and what would you know of the slashdot groupthink, Mister 8xx.xxx slashbot who opened his account last week, uh?

Re:Wow! (5, Funny)

Necrobruiser (611198) | more than 9 years ago | (#11353769)

We don't have, nor should we expect, the right to pirate movies.

But I love Pirate movies! The Curse of the Black Pearl was awesome!

Re:Wow! (5, Funny)

flyingsquid (813711) | more than 9 years ago | (#11353909)

But I love Pirate movies!

Hey, anyone want to go see a pirate movie?

...it's rated ARRRRRR.

Re:Wow! (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11353787)

It shouldn't be illegal to transmit bits and bytes over a wire. It is not tantamount to theft in any way.

Re:Wow! (1)

Rosco P. Coltrane (209368) | more than 9 years ago | (#11353854)

It shouldn't be illegal to transmit bits and bytes over a wire. It is not tantamount to theft in any way.

disingenuity at its best!

Look, it's illegal to photocopy books. Everybody understands why, and yet I'm only capturing photons with a photocopier. Right? Well, same with bytes that encode a movie.

You're free to encode and send anything that you yourself created and decided to distribute for free explicitely however...

Re:Wow! (1)

joeslice (842665) | more than 9 years ago | (#11353793)

No one in this discussion has ever pirated movies, to be sure! You're preaching to the choir.

Is there anything on BitTorrent besides legitamate, free, fully transferrable, liscened software?

Re:Wow! (1)

dewke (44893) | more than 9 years ago | (#11353907)

And how does that makes it right?

No (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11353693)

It's "Your Rights Online" not "Your Online Rights"

Re:No (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11353765)

That doesn't make much sense. Why not call Games "Games Online" and IT "IT Online"?

Re:No (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11353915)

Because it's just aname and they're not bound to create a uniform system out of it for all the sections?

Cane Him!!! (1, Flamebait)

swl72us (847573) | more than 9 years ago | (#11353650)

Cane him!

Re:Cane Him!!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11353676)

Your reference is wrong. Singapore was the nation where that was done, not Hong Kong. Maybe you're just ignorant?

Re:Cane Him!!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11353729)

Have you considered that swl72us may be from Singapore, and perhaps even is a member of the PhascistAP?

Re:Cane Him!!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11353721)

that's Singapore. Hong Kong is China. Try "reeducation camp".

Re:Cane Him!!! (1)

LurkerXXX (667952) | more than 9 years ago | (#11353775)

Isn't telling everyone that he likes Daredevil, Red Planet and Miss Congeniality enough of a punishment? Oh the humiliation.

Slap on the wrist (1)

Tackhead (54550) | more than 9 years ago | (#11353652)

> a 38-year-old was arrested in Hong Kong for uploading Daredevil, Red Planet and Miss Congeniality via a BitTorrent client. Hong Kong laws provide for a maximum of 4 years in prison and $6,400 fine for every copy distributed without copyright owner's permission.

...lawyers for the suspect have expressed gratitude to the authorities for choosing not to proceed with charges of having egregiously bad taste in cinema.

for every copy (1)

gl4ss (559668) | more than 9 years ago | (#11353653)

ok.. so it's automatically a life sentence for distributing 10 pieces of gifs you didn't own.

pretty harsh. but then again you could get shot for something as mild as that...

(note: it's such a thing that the gov. can use to put away anyone they want for life.. but it's not like chinese gov would need to create excuses for that)

Re:for every copy (1)

Zakabog (603757) | more than 9 years ago | (#11353789)

No they can get a MAX of 40 years, there is no minimum jail sentence, however the fine will be $64,000 for those 10 gifs you don't own.

Fortunately (4, Interesting)

Aexia (517457) | more than 9 years ago | (#11353657)

He was a bittorrent freeloader so he's only responsible for uploading 0.013 copies. That's... what? 83 bucks? I think he'll be fine.

Re:Fortunately (2, Insightful)

Antonymous Flower (848759) | more than 9 years ago | (#11353728)

This is an interesting point. Bittorrent does not transmit files in a linear fashion. The client requests parts of the file and other clients respond. It is very possible for all parts to be from seperate clients. How will they determine how many copies he distributed?

Re:Fortunately (1)

SilverspurG (844751) | more than 9 years ago | (#11353798)

They'll make it easy and assign full responsibility to the one guy they caught. That's why they only charged him with three movies. If the defense tries to balk at full responsibility, they'll drag out the list of the other 6000 mp3s and movies he's been connected to.

Re:Fortunately (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11353802)

dude, this is China. They won't determine how many copies he distributed. They'll make a guess, and that will be stuck to, and it won't be challenged. There is no rule of law in East/S.E. Asia, it is made up on the fly by the powers that be.

Choice of movies (1)

fembots (753724) | more than 9 years ago | (#11353658)

Luckily he only uploaded old and unpopular movies, so the impact/loss to movie industry isn't huge.

Re:Choice of movies (1)

Rosco P. Coltrane (209368) | more than 9 years ago | (#11353762)

Luckily he only uploaded old and unpopular movies, so the impact/loss to movie industry isn't huge.

Actually, I have a feeling that the choice of arrestee by HK's flavor of the **AA was not random.

Think about it: by sueing this man who uploads phenomenally shitty flicks, they achieve three goals:

We're-after-you-so-you-better-stop! deterrent message

They'll defend any piece of shit in their catalog just as well as blockbusters, so there's no need to think you're less visible if you download crap

It puts the names of the aforementioned shite flicks back into the limelight, which might actually entice a few more people to rent out the DVDs, just to check them out

I think it's quite a subtle way of sueing a P2Per from the movie industry, and it has nothing to do with chance.

P2P won't make illegal sharing 'safe' only 'easy' (5, Interesting)

John.P.Jones (601028) | more than 9 years ago | (#11353659)

This is the way it will continue to be, they can't stop us so they will be forced to prosecute us...

FACT: At some point in any file distribution protocol on the Internet a 'client' has been directed to a 'server' (peers, whatever) for a piece of information. The 'client' asks for this info and the 'server' provides it.

If the info being transfered is copyrighted then it is not legal for the 'client' to ask for and accept this info nor it is it legal for the 'server' to respond to these requests. If both the 'client' and 'server' are coroporating then this transfer will happen just fine.

If however either the 'client' or the 'server' are undercover 'good guys' then they can easilly rat out the other party; who, in the Internet, can eventually be tracked down and served with a lawsuit.

If you are running software that either requests (a 'client') or distributes (a 'server') information subject to copyrights then the copyright holder or an agent acting on their behalf can bust you, provided that the magic peer-to-peer search leads them to you (or your search leads you to them).

The only legal questions are whether this constitutes entrapment. If it does the pirates win and copyright law is broken. If it doesn't then the RIAA/MPAA/whoever wins and copyright law is safe.

All the fancy peer-to-peer protocol magic in the world can't change these basic facts. You don't anonymously receive and send packets on the Internet, you have a designated IP address and that can be followed to you.

On the other hand a different argument based on 'first principles' makes 'Digital copyright management' schemes such as CSS, HDCP, and Windows media also can't work.

The end result is that reality is set up to make copyright infringement impossible to stop and also impossible to hide (unless you absolutely trust who you are sharing information with, an unreasonable assumption).

This is just like the rest of life, breaking the law (murder, terrorism, etc) is VERY easy but getting away with it is VERY hard thus we make the punishment too great to worth the risk. Of course terrorism fails to respond to this formula and thus results in an up-hill battle that no one likes (lack of freedoms, privacy and security), one that eventually is destined to fail terribly.

Re:P2P won't make illegal sharing 'safe' only 'eas (1)

Marxist Hacker 42 (638312) | more than 9 years ago | (#11353740)

One way to foul this all up- have multiple NAT routers between you and the file server in question.

Re:P2P won't make illegal sharing 'safe' only 'eas (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11353761)

If however either the 'client' or the 'server' are undercover 'good guys' then they can easilly rat out the other party; who, in the Internet, can eventually be tracked down and served with a lawsuit.

wouldn't that be a clearcut case of entrapment??

hmm, on the other hand, in the movies the police always sell drugs to some bigass drug bosses while undercover. if that ain't entrapment, than surely baiting someone on the net with illegal content can't be either...

jethr0

Re:P2P won't make illegal sharing 'safe' only 'eas (1)

recursiv (324497) | more than 9 years ago | (#11353767)

Fancy number theory makes a lot of things possible that would seem intuitively impossible. Check out Freenet [sourceforge.net] . You are making assumptions that aren't always true. For example, let's say you download two seeming random blocks of binary data and XOR them together, and you get the latest hollywood blockbuster. Who is violating copyright in this case?

Re:P2P won't make illegal sharing 'safe' only 'eas (1)

John.P.Jones (601028) | more than 9 years ago | (#11353889)

Both sites you downloaded each 'half' from are responsible (as are you) and the site where you learned about the correlation of these two pieces of information. This isn't a gray area at all. Theoretically you could be holding onto random data that you don't know is copyrighted but where did you get that data? Why are you holding and distributing it and what do people search for when they are lead to that data?

Your example is just an example of an inefficient bit representation of the data, not some sneaky 'perfect encryption' as you suggest (of course it COULD be but it isn't).

Re:P2P won't make illegal sharing 'safe' only 'eas (1)

Macadamizer (194404) | more than 9 years ago | (#11353776)

"The only legal questions are whether this constitutes entrapment. If it does the pirates win and copyright law is broken. If it doesn't then the RIAA/MPAA/whoever wins and copyright law is safe. "

DISCLAIMER: What follows is based on U.S. law. If you are not in the U.S., your laws can and will vary.

Well, legally, it probably wouldn't be entrapment. Entrapment is actually an incredibly narrow issue -- basically, you have to enticed into doing something you would not normally do. So, if you are looking to buy pot, and but from an undercover cop, that's not entrapment, because you were going to buy the pot any -- the cop didn't entice you into doing something you wouldn't otherwise do.

If you were searching for illegal materials online, and a server gave them to you then ratted you out, again, that wouldn't be entrapment, because you were looking for the illegal stuff.

I guess if you were honestly an "innocent infringer" then maybe this would hold up, but "innocent infringer" can be pretty tough to prove, and is not even allowed as a defense if the copyright is registered, as all movies are.

So, what would entrapment be? If an undercover cop gave you a birthday present, which you didn't like so you regifted, and then the cop arrested you for trafficking in stolen goods, becausew the gift he gave you was originally stolen, well, that's the kind of thing that is entrapment under the legal standards. Virtually none of the things that people usually think of as entrapment -- dope buys from undercover cops, cops posing as hookers, speed traps, etc. -- are legally entrapment.

Re:P2P won't make illegal sharing 'safe' only 'eas (1)

Macadamizer (194404) | more than 9 years ago | (#11353819)

Sorry about the multiple typos -- should have used the 'preview' button...

"...basically, you have BE to enticed..."

"...and BUY from an undercover cop..."

"...to buy the pot ANYWAY..."

proofread next time...

Re:P2P won't make illegal sharing 'safe' only 'eas (1)

dewke (44893) | more than 9 years ago | (#11353852)

The only legal questions are whether this constitutes entrapment.

Here is a definition of entrapment:

ENTRAPMENT - A person is 'entrapped' when he is induced or persuaded by law enforcement officers or their agents to commit a crime that he had no previous intent to commit; and the law as a matter of policy forbids conviction in such a case.

However, there is no entrapment where a person is ready and willing to break the law and the Government agents merely provide what appears to be a favorable opportunity for the person to commit the crime. For example, it is not entrapment for a Government agent to pretend to be someone else and to offer, either directly or through an informer or other decoy, to engage in an unlawful transaction with the person. So, a person would not be a victim of entrapment if the person was ready, willing and able to commit the crime charged in the indictment whenever opportunity was afforded, and that Government officers or their agents did no more than offer an opportunity.


Did someone call him up and say "hey dude share some crappy movies? No. Did the cops install bittorrent on his pc and set it up? No. This dude broke the law in his country and is being punished. Whether or not you agree with it is a different story.

Re:P2P won't make illegal sharing 'safe' only 'eas (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11353862)

Wow. Someone 'mod' this guy 'down' for 'overusing quotes' and 'eating his own dandruff'.

That, and the body text is just moronic and not very well thought out :P

Re:P2P won't make illegal sharing 'safe' only 'eas (1)

fishbowl (7759) | more than 9 years ago | (#11353863)

"If the info being transfered is copyrighted then it is not legal for the 'client' to ask for and accept this info nor it is it legal for the 'server' to respond to these requests."

Even that statement is not anywhere nearly true enough to be reasonable. There is possibly as much material that is copyrighted, but permitted to be distributed, as not.

This means the problem is even bigger than it appears. On the other hand, nobody honestly believed it was permitted to distribute the items in the story, in Hong Kong. There are two ingredients, though: 1. The owner of the distribution rights to Miss Congeniality chooses to 2. restrict those rights.

Merely being copyrighted alone does not make it illegal to transfer a file! If that were the case, how would you get GCC or Mozilla? More to the point, how do you make the same law that protects GCC in the way the FSF wants it protected, also protect Miss Congeniality in the way Warner Bros wants it protected?

Simply saying "this material is copyrighted, and therefore is a no-no" actually serves to *abridge* the rights of some people creating content! If I write music, and I want it distributed, does that mean I have to give up my copyright? NO! But a blanket argument like yours, which is a common misconception, does serve to reduce my own rights, and increases the power of the large media corporations by doing so.

I'm obviously NAL but... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11353660)

I came home and my roomate was running Azureus on my computer. If I'm running it, I usually just run it until I've got a take/share ratio of 1.0, then shut it down. He had left it on all night!

So what if I get arrested for some bogus music/movies/whatever he's sharing, when I had no knowlege of it even going on? What's the call?

Re:I'm obviously NAL but... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11353895)

You know Azureus gives you the option to automatically stop sharing files after you hit a 1.000 (or whatever you choose) share ratio, right? It's under Ignore Rules.

Dammit! (2, Funny)

FyRE666 (263011) | more than 9 years ago | (#11353661)

I'd nearly finished that download too! Why don't the authorities pick on the torrents with a lot of seeds to give people a chance?...

How many pieces? (2, Interesting)

MicktheMech (697533) | more than 9 years ago | (#11353665)

With Bit-Torrent you upload piece-meal, so if he say only uploaded 1/4 of a movie's worth would he get 1 year? Or did he just upload the tracker? But, that really wouldn't be a copyrighted work, because the file isn't contained in the tracker, right?

Re:How many pieces? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11353690)

it's possible he seeded the torrent.. meaning he was the original and only source for the file until someone else completely downloaded it and started seeding

But.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11353667)

But I thought that in Hong Kong, BitTorrent was only for old people! ::Ducks::

Charges (1)

raider_red (156642) | more than 9 years ago | (#11353668)

Copyright infringement, and three counts of extremely bad taste and wasted bandwidth.

Hong Kong /= Copyright Enforcement (4, Funny)

sofakingon (610999) | more than 9 years ago | (#11353669)

Since when does Hong Kong care about copyright/patent enforcement? The last time I was there I could have gotten a (counterfeit) North Face coat, Rolex watch, and Prada bag, and for about $100US. What gives? 3 movies? I mean, seriously...

Re:Hong Kong /= Copyright Enforcement (2, Informative)

sofakingon (610999) | more than 9 years ago | (#11353723)

Not to mention pirated DVD's to include screeners for $1 a piece.

Re:Hong Kong /= Copyright Enforcement (1)

AceCaseOR (594637) | more than 9 years ago | (#11353800)

And bootleg Anime with some of the funniest subtitles you could ever find. ;-)

Re:Hong Kong /= Copyright Enforcement (2, Insightful)

NMerriam (15122) | more than 9 years ago | (#11353866)

Yeah, but you can get all that stuff on the street in NYC, too. It doesn't mean the US turns a blind eye to copyright/trademark laws, only that the NYPD and DA have better things to do most days.

When they say.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11353673)

When they say for every copy distributed do they really mean that they will base the sentence's severity on how many copies were distributed?

Not only does that seem a little extreme, but it's almost as if you're fate is determined by the popularity of your upload.

Is that... (2, Interesting)

the_skywise (189793) | more than 9 years ago | (#11353679)

4 years for every COPY distributed? Or 4 years for every copy DISTRIBUTED? (IE is he potentially going to jail 12 years for putting up 3 movies or 4 * 1000 thousand downloads?)

Before the argument starts: (1)

Geoffreyerffoeg (729040) | more than 9 years ago | (#11353687)

This is a good day for piracy and IP rights in general.

This is a bad day for BitTorrent in general.

I don't think anyone can validly claim that BitTorrent needs to be banned, or that Miss Congeniality needs to go to the public domain.

12 years for 3 copies (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11353694)

12 years, you'll get less than that for killing someone in the uk.

Or lower your prices... (1)

fetus (322414) | more than 9 years ago | (#11353696)

I don't even own a DVD player but recently I've been on a DVD buying spree. Why? Because stores everywhere are having great deals and I've got some of my favorite movies for $7.50. The rest I paid nothing over $10. If any of these movies were $15 or more I never would have bought them. Why the hell I am going to pay $22 for Anchor Man on DVD when 50% of people said the movie sucked. Get a clue with the pricing...

I thought China was in charge of Hong Kong Now (1)

Marxist Hacker 42 (638312) | more than 9 years ago | (#11353697)

And from their actions, do they even HAVE copyright laws in China?

Pattern or simply courtesy arrest? (1)

Marnhinn (310256) | more than 9 years ago | (#11353700)

One wonders if this is going to become a pattern in places like Hong Kong, Bangkok and other area's of the world where piracy is strong - or simply a courtesy arrest to please the complaining MPAA.

I saw police shut down a kiosk in Moscow once for selling pirated movies (a legit store across the street had complained) but within a day the kiosk re-opened, it simply moved further down the road.

Since we lack details, and no charges have been filed yet, I guess we will have to wait and see. Even if he is convicted, I doubt he would get the maximum penalty of 4 yrs in jail (more then likely IMO that he will get the fine - 6,400 for every illegal copy (how would you track that on bittorrent?)

Miss Congeniality!?! (1)

stungod (137601) | more than 9 years ago | (#11353703)

OK, let me be the first to say that I don't usually agree with these kind of arrests but that was way out of line. Did he think somebody was actually going to watch that turd?

The only thing worse is explaining to friends and family what caused you to get arrested.

OK, enough cheap humor. This thread's gonaa go downhill fast anyway...I'll just stop now.

Re:Miss Congeniality!?! (1)

krbvroc1 (725200) | more than 9 years ago | (#11353871)

I think the real crime is that they were falsely labelled as '0-day'.

Article not clear (1)

omnisync (715232) | more than 9 years ago | (#11353704)

I wonder if he was only hosting the torrent files or if he was also the tracker for those torrents. Don't you like vague articles!? Omni

I'm sure the **AA will LOVE this to become US law. (1)

Yo Grark (465041) | more than 9 years ago | (#11353709)

"Hong Kong authorities have made their first arrest for allegedly " and then later, "The suspect was not immediately charged and investigations are continuing,"

In Hong Kong, you can be arrested without being charged with anything?!?

Yo Grark

Re:I'm sure the **AA will LOVE this to become US l (1)

iworm (132527) | more than 9 years ago | (#11353838)

Just like the good ole US of A - where you can get locked up *indefinitely* without being charged. Makes the Chinese look like a bunch of friggin liberals.

Re:I'm sure the **AA will LOVE this to become US l (1)

Anonymous Cowpat (788193) | more than 9 years ago | (#11353858)

not charged immediately....

The police (at least in Britain) tend to arrest, question, charge (they only get to hold people for 12 hours without an extension from a magistrate and there is a limit on the total time) before the person has to be released, bailed or charged. (IANAL etc)

Re:I'm sure the **AA will LOVE this to become US l (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11353900)

Um, yeah, that is how the law works everywhere. You are arrested on suspicion and then charged within a fixed time period or released if the police can't make a case. Or sent to camp X-ray where your lawyer can't reach you.

only 6000? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11353711)

well well; there they settle with 6000 per moevy? how many "original" DVDs could you buy with that?

some are very expensive here, like 40 when it's one of those collector boxes or something. That would be like only the license of 150 DVDs, but how many times will the stolen moevys be copied?

The penalty wasn't severe enough... (3, Funny)

nganju (821034) | more than 9 years ago | (#11353749)

The punishment for distributing Miss Congeniality, legally or illegally, should be death.

Re:The penalty wasn't severe enough... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11353846)

But i like Sandra Bullock, anyone ever watch that other movie she was in you know ugghhh..... hmmm nevermind!!

Don't call it a "BitTorrent Arrest" (5, Insightful)

jqh1 (212455) | more than 9 years ago | (#11353758)

Don't call it a "BitTorrent Arrest" -- some of my best friends use BitTorrent for perfectly legitimate reasons... It's really an arrest for piracy.

Long live BitTorrent (1)

News for nerds (448130) | more than 9 years ago | (#11353764)

Next time, ask someone in North Korea to host sensitive data!

Another story... (1)

vyrus128 (747164) | more than 9 years ago | (#11353771)

... better placed in the Peer2Peer category. Which ought, of course, to be created first.

Looks like its just 4 years then. (2, Funny)

TheLittleJetson (669035) | more than 9 years ago | (#11353773)

...$6,400 fine for every copy distributed without copyright owner's permission.

Luckily, there were no downloads of these fine films.

"Uploading" using BitTorrent? (1)

meisenst (104896) | more than 9 years ago | (#11353790)

They don't provide crucial information in this article, which is really more like a paragraphed spittle of information, really.

1. Was this guy the original seed?

2. Was he even a seed? Or was he just downloading them?

I think this is very important, especially given that as a BitTorrent user, one can only be so selective about one's involvement in the distribution of the file(s). If this guy was just downloading the files (not sure why anyone would, but hey), and was arrested for uploading them, that would be a Very Bad Thing.

Re:"Uploading" using BitTorrent? (1)

Jane_the_Great (778338) | more than 9 years ago | (#11353828)

"Was he even a seed? Or was he just downloading them?"
Two separate questions. Let's suppose he wasn't a seed - downloading from the torrent means he was uploading to others as well as downloading for himself. That's the way bittorrent works.

So tell me - why is it a bad thing? He was supplying copyrighted material to others in violation of the law. Don't like copyright law? Get it changed, don't break it.

Re:"Uploading" using BitTorrent? (1)

g0dsp33d (849253) | more than 9 years ago | (#11353913)

You bring up an interesting point, supposing he was just downloading them and not a seed, and supposing he had copies of the movies already, could he get in trouble for it? (ie he's too lazy to rip them so he just downloads them instead)

Daredevil (2, Funny)

mabu (178417) | more than 9 years ago | (#11353806)

If you're distributing Daredevil you deserve to be arrested, piracy or not.

i wonder when... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11353814)

wardrivers will find a good wifi point and take a older PC that is almost ready to be disposed of and load it with movies, mp3 and lots of other media, and set it up in some discrete location where electricity is available and connect it running some p2p app and walk away leaving it to run untill it either dies or is found and stolen or confiscated...

huh? (0, Redundant)

tedtimmons (97599) | more than 9 years ago | (#11353832)

Miss Congeniality? Was he arrested for poor/distasteful use of bandwidth?

One of those things (5, Funny)

mordx (463323) | more than 9 years ago | (#11353833)

The truth is that the Hong Kong street vendors selling pirated copies of movies, software, etc are taking a beating from the people choosing to use P2P methods of obtaining their media. A group of street vendors has taken it upon themselves to turn in every BT user they can identify in the hopes that people will quit using P2P and go back to the street vendors. The cops are rather upset about it to as they get kickbacks from the street vendors which have gotten smaller as well.

Re:One of those things (2, Interesting)

AceCaseOR (594637) | more than 9 years ago | (#11353881)

Not to mention the Street Vendors are (or at least were) affiliated with the Triads. Every time someone in Hong Kong downloads a movie, a Triad boss loses money.

Oh, and by the way, if you ever go to Hong Kong and decid to buy counterfeit clothing, DVDs, or whatever, don't pay with a credit card, or else you'll become part of another classic Triad racket - counterfeit credit cards.

Comment (1)

Antony-Kyre (807195) | more than 9 years ago | (#11353845)

The problem has two sides. One, violating another's copyright. Two, movie companies charging a lot for their movies.

actually... (1)

Hellasboy (120979) | more than 9 years ago | (#11353868)

the authorities didn't arrest him for just the act of uploading movies. it was because he uploaded those movies. he was dragging down the rep of all the pirates in China.

imagine what they think of the people that actually made those films...

iWon news (2, Funny)

Steffan (126616) | more than 9 years ago | (#11353880)

Ironic the link is posted on 'iWon' news. Well, he's certainly going to get a prize...

I wonder.... (3, Funny)

John Pfeiffer (454131) | more than 9 years ago | (#11353894)

I wonder which this guy feels dumber about, getting arrested for using bittorrent, or getting arrested for distributing crap.

And, I take it that figure is in USD, correct? 'cause I could probably find that much in HKD in my COUCH. :P

Remember, kids (4, Insightful)

Dark Paladin (116525) | more than 9 years ago | (#11353903)

Bittorrents don't upload copyrighted files - people do.

My rights online? (2, Informative)

Wrexen (151642) | more than 9 years ago | (#11353906)

Can anyone explain to me why it's my right to violate copyright law while on the internet?

OMG (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#11353916)

I literally just finished watching Daredevil before reading this story.

I got it off DC++ though.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

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

Submission Text Formatting Tips

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

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

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

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

Loading...