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!

IsoHunt Shut Down?

CmdrTaco posted more than 7 years ago | from the copyright-wack-a-mole dept.

Media 297

psic writes "One of the most popular torrent search sites, IsoHunt, was taken down on tuesday. The owners of the site say that the move came from their ISP without prior notice, though it is probably linked with the MPAA's lawsuit against various torrent search sites earlier this year. They plan on moving ISPs from the US to Canada, and say that moving the servers so someplace like Sweden or Sealand is not an option, as they put it: "BitTorrent was created for legitimate distribution of large media files, and we stand by that philosophy as a search engine and aggregator."" This is a story we've heard before with other sites, only serving to further demonstrate that playing wack a mole with torrent aggregators isn't the solution to anything.

cancel ×

297 comments

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

the obligatory... (5, Insightful)

apodyopsis (1048476) | more than 7 years ago | (#17647252)

The more you tighten your grip, Tarkin, the more star systems will slip through your fingers

Re:the obligatory... (-1, Redundant)

zoftie (195518) | more than 7 years ago | (#17647274)

thats quite an apt metaphor

Re:the obligatory... (0, Redundant)

jackharrer (972403) | more than 7 years ago | (#17648514)

Another one:

What doesn't kill makes us stronger //Nietzche

Now isohunt will move to different country so US law will not apply to it. There'll be no way to kill it. Good job MPIAA! Instead of attacking company itself they chose to use indirect attack at ISP which in effect just made isohunt stronger. After few days of problems.

Keep going MPIA/RIAA!

Re:the obligatory... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17647342)

Makes you wonder what kind of Death Star they're coming up with...

Re:the obligatory... (0)

richdun (672214) | more than 7 years ago | (#17647650)

The new new HD format - a giant holo-sphere that shoots you with a planet-killer laser beam if you try to use it with a PC or other "Rebel" device.

Re:the obligatory... (0)

delinear (991444) | more than 7 years ago | (#17647742)

At least they're not copying the gaming industry, "Use the starforce, Luke"

Who is Hunt? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17647784)

And why is the search for Hunt now called off?

Re:the obligatory... (0)

jasondlee (70657) | more than 7 years ago | (#17647852)

Ugh. Enough of this stupid quote. Godwin? Care to come up with something new?

Re:the obligatory... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17648184)

The more you tighten your grip, Tarkin, the more star systems will slip through your fingers

Ah, spoken like a true 8 year-old.

How about next time you be original and quote something like Ren and Stimpy?

Re:the obligatory... (1)

boisepunk (764513) | more than 7 years ago | (#17648192)

Bad metaphor and at best a flawed analogy. They first need TO GET a grip.

Re:the obligatory... (5, Funny)

Mateo_LeFou (859634) | more than 7 years ago | (#17648404)

from now on can we just abbreviate?

TMYTYGTTMSSWSTYF

saves screen space

Link is down (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17647268)

anyone got a mirror?

Re:Link is down (1)

morgan_greywolf (835522) | more than 7 years ago | (#17648428)

Here ya go. [64.233.167.104] HTH.

Only reason this is personally a bummer... (1)

ystar (898731) | more than 7 years ago | (#17647290)

IsoHunt was great because advertising on the site wasn't obnoxious enough to "get in the way" of searches as much as it often does on other sites....of course, all my torrent use takes place on domains registered under Ubuntu, so I have no idea what I'm talking about...

Re:Only reason this is personally a bummer... (2, Insightful)

Drakin020 (980931) | more than 7 years ago | (#17647542)

What about www.demonoid.com? They have allways been good to me and never in the way with anoying advertisements.

Re:Only reason this is personally a bummer... (2, Funny)

pipatron (966506) | more than 7 years ago | (#17647654)

Unfortunately it doesn't work for the leechers. Otherwise I think it's great.

Re:Only reason this is personally a bummer... (1)

Drakin020 (980931) | more than 7 years ago | (#17647900)

It doesn't work for the leechers...Isn't that a good thing???

Re:Only reason this is personally a bummer... (1)

slack_prad (942084) | more than 7 years ago | (#17648282)

While it is a good thing, not everyone who uses internet has 1:1 UP/DOWN speeds, and usually it's 1:4

Re:Only reason this is personally a bummer... (1)

digitrev (989335) | more than 7 years ago | (#17648416)

Seed longer? Limit your up and down to the same speed? Make your up speed unlimited, but your down limited? Just throwing out suggestions. Demonoid works just fine for me, especially since it's an easy hosting service as well.

good idea, bad idea (5, Interesting)

theStorminMormon (883615) | more than 7 years ago | (#17647292)

This is a story we've heard before with other sites, only serving to further demonstrate that playing wack a mole with torrent aggregators isn't the solution to anything.

I wholeheartedly agree that, from the perspective of the **AA, playing wack-a-mole isn't a good solution. But as an observer it's pretty funny.

More seriously, I think it is providing a long term solution, just not the one the **AA want. As these stories grow they continue to be seen as the greedy bullies they truly are. The main purpose of the RIAA and MPAA these days is to do the dirty work for the actual labels/studios and absorb the backlash. People get mad at the RIAA, not Sony. Or so the strategy goes. As anti-RIAA and anti-MPAA sentiment grows in severity and spreads into the mainstream, there will start to be bleedthrough to the actual labels and studios.

So basically the wack-a-mole strategy is the best education we could hope for that IP laws are a disgrace, that greed is the real motivator of DRM, and that DRM does nothing but create a nuisance for the consumer without effectively harming pirates. I want more and more of your average Joes to hear about stuff like this and start asking "What is with these guys anyway?" The answers will lead to some sensible IP reform.

It's a long-term goal, and I realize that in the meantime a lot of innocent people are having their lives ruined, but I think that tactics like this go a long way towards the final solution for DRM.

-stormin

Re:good idea, bad idea (2, Insightful)

Huitzlopochtli (824537) | more than 7 years ago | (#17647368)

A lot of innocent people are having their lives ruined? Since when have the majority of Americans used torrent? How many do you think are really affected by this? Torrent is not a protocol widely in use by the 'Average Joe', and as such, the shutdown of sites like isoHunt won't have any real effect on them. Recall how widely the Napster issue was publicized on the news...do you really think shutdown of torrent sites will get that kind of press? Also...can you really consider those who download illegal torrents..."innocent"?

Re:good idea, bad idea (5, Interesting)

Zapperlink (635003) | more than 7 years ago | (#17647430)

The point is IsoHunt is purely a medium which people could search out torrents. The purpose was to make a library of legit legal torrents that people have created. With positive ideas such as IsoHunt's it also brings in the idea that we can also share that which isn't legal with our friends just as quick. To manage this idea would be riddled with problems. Would you shut down google because it linked to bomb making instructions, or even torrents directly where you can get your favorite Adobe product for free? The answer is simply no. It's just another attempt to target a resource that is popular for being able to find things efficiently.

Re:good idea, bad idea (4, Funny)

xiong.chiamiov (871823) | more than 7 years ago | (#17647756)

My favorite Adobe product? That would be, uh, just a minute ...

Re:good idea, bad idea (4, Interesting)

shark72 (702619) | more than 7 years ago | (#17647930)

"The point is IsoHunt is purely a medium which people could search out torrents. The purpose was to make a library of legit legal torrents that people have created."

The first clue that the above is bullshit is the site's title. "legit, legal" torrents are seldom distributed as ISOs. If you're thinking that it refers to Linux ISOs, think again -- there's already a site [legaltorrents.com] specializing in "legit, legal" torrents. Notice that there are few if any ISOs to be had there, and no Linux distros.

Listen, I understand why the owners of ISOHunt think they need to keep chanting the "legitimate" line; it's to build a case that they didn't have intent [wikipedia.org] . But we don't need to be their stooges. We know exactly why ISOHunt was there. Let's not kid ourselves.

Re:good idea, bad idea (1)

LordSnooty (853791) | more than 7 years ago | (#17648368)

there are few if any ISOs to be had there, and no Linux distros.
Well no, the Linux ISOs are already tracked by other people, and it seems pointless to seed copies of already-existing torrent downloads, as the torrent network benefits when more people join. Splitting the user base across several trackers would be to everyone's detriment.

Re:good idea, bad idea (4, Informative)

theStorminMormon (883615) | more than 7 years ago | (#17647488)

I was referring to the RIAAs practice of suing everyone and their grandmother without regard to the evidence, literally. This is another element of the wack-a-mole strategy. I thought my reference to the RIAA by name, among other things, would have made this obvious.

-stormin

Re:good idea, bad idea (2, Informative)

Daemonstar (84116) | more than 7 years ago | (#17647766)

A lot of innocent people are having their lives ruined?
I think he's referring to the lawsuits against people who have not done anything wrong but have had lawsuits brought against them.

Also...can you really consider those who download illegal torrents..."innocent"?
You assume that people have no legal right to the files they download using links on the site. I have downloaded several games, CD's and even some books that I do own, but they have either become unreadable, stolen or lost over the years.

Re:good idea, bad idea (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17648444)

You assume that people have no legal right to the files

Well, most of the time they don't have that right.

Depending on where you live and what is stated in the EULA:

- Software, you may make 1 backup copy of the disk. The copy would be of the disk that is in your possession (i.e. copy would have the same CD-Key).

- Audio CDs, the verdict is not out on what is legal and not legal. If the *AA have their way, we won't even be allowed to RIP to mp3 format.

- Books, I believe that, in most places, you cannot even make a copy of a book for yourself without paying some fee. So it would likely be illegal to download a copy of the book. It's not illegal to make a photocopy of it since you'd be paying a copyright fee. Again, this is only true in some places, libraries actually pay copyright fees for their copy machines. Legit copy services will charge you a copyright fee or refuse to copy.

- when something is stolen from you, you have LOST it, by law you need to PAY for another copy. This is what happened when my car was stolen, I lost all of my CDs and my insurance paid out cash to replace them.

And please give us all a break. I'm sure your ISP can figure out that the 350GB you downloaded last month was NOT all legit.

Same Task, Different Tools (1)

camperdave (969942) | more than 7 years ago | (#17647904)

Hey! It's perfectly legal for me to time shift a TV show using a blank tape and a VCR. Why would it be illegal to time shift the same show with a torrent site and a computer?

Re:Same Task, Different Tools (4, Insightful)

nomadic (141991) | more than 7 years ago | (#17648046)

Hey! It's perfectly legal for me to time shift a TV show using a blank tape and a VCR. Why would it be illegal to time shift the same show with a torrent site and a computer?

Torrents generally encompass people-shifting, which isn't quite legal...

Re:good idea, bad idea (1)

iminplaya (723125) | more than 7 years ago | (#17648548)

Also...can you really consider those who download illegal torrents..."innocent"?

Illegal!=Wrong, so yes, they are innocent of any wrongdoing.

Re:good idea, bad idea (1)

CaymanIslandCarpedie (868408) | more than 7 years ago | (#17648546)

I wouldn't be so quick to jump on the **AA (OK you probably should), but it may not be them. Yesterday, I posted a link http://apple.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=217180&c id=17633124 [slashdot.org] to OSX on ISOHunt in the story about Apple sueing for posting links to the iPhone skins.

My bad ISOHunt! I didn't realize Apple monitored /. that closely. Sorry!!!!

are they crazy? (5, Funny)

mastershake_phd (1050150) | more than 7 years ago | (#17647300)

Who wouldnt want to be the first torrent site on Sealand?

Re:are they crazy? (4, Funny)

hotdiggitydawg (881316) | more than 7 years ago | (#17648172)

Who wouldnt want to be the first torrent site on Sealand?
Shhh, don't tell them! Otherwise if I want first torrent site I'll have to wait until someone decides to create New Sealand... How many sheep can you fit on an oil platform?

Isohunt (2, Interesting)

shirizaki (994008) | more than 7 years ago | (#17647320)

Good one, probably a little bit better than TPB for a few files. I also liked their "mod choice" or whatever it was called. They actually approved certain files so you knew you weren't getting dummy info. they also had a ton of trackers for every torrent.

I hope they go back up soon. I liked them.

Re:Isohunt (1)

Thansal (999464) | more than 7 years ago | (#17647466)

they were better then TPB because they Indexed TPB's trackers as well as all other public trackers.

And THAT is the interesting (and worying) part. They don't even host trackers (last I checked), they just index other trackers! It is kinda like shitting down google because you can find torrents ussing their search engine.

Example: Need For Speed search [google.com]

Re:Isohunt (3, Funny)

Thansal (999464) | more than 7 years ago | (#17647504)

shutting
shutting down....

yah, I should use preview more often.

Re:Isohunt (1)

dave420 (699308) | more than 7 years ago | (#17647800)

They indexed TPB, so it had all its content, and content from other trackers, so it was considerably better than TPB, from a choice perspective at least. They rule :)

BT hijacked (1)

cpearson (809811) | more than 7 years ago | (#17647412)

The MPAA is essentially hijacking bittorrent technology for their own greedy uses. We will see non-regulated bittorrent become a relic of internet as we know it.

http://www.vistahelpforum.com/ [vistahelpforum.com]

Re:BT hijacked (1)

mastershake_phd (1050150) | more than 7 years ago | (#17647550)

The MPAA is essentially hijacking bittorrent technology for their own greedy uses. We will see non-regulated bittorrent become a relic of internet as we know it.

A relic, not so long as torrent sites like the Pirate Bay are around, and it doesnt look like PB is going anywhere. If bittorent moves into the history books it will be because it was replaced with a better p2p protocol. The free exchange of data cannot and should not be stopped.

Bow to the upstream, for he is your master. (4, Insightful)

Kadin2048 (468275) | more than 7 years ago | (#17647670)

All well and good until your ISP throttles all bandwidth for unapproved services, where "approved" services are ones sanctioned by the RIAA/MPAA, and which also pay a tithe to your ISP.

With the end of network neutrality, it could easily happen.

Re:Bow to the upstream, for he is your master. (1)

simm1701 (835424) | more than 7 years ago | (#17647964)

then people will just do torrent over https, or ssh tunnelling over https, or ppp over https (and yes it can actually be done, corkscrew is the best example for ssh over https via a https proxy) I've played at ppp over https myself - a few hundred lines of code will get it working - true my version had tonnes of overhead so wasn't very efficient, but it proved the point well enough.

If torrent gets blocked at the protocol layer, it will just start working on top of a different protocol - there are plenty avilable!!

Who's fault is it? (2, Insightful)

SandwhichMaster (1044184) | more than 7 years ago | (#17647456)

Its frustrating to see sites take the fall for things that aren't their fault. Holding isoHunt responsible for people downloading illegal content is stupid. Why stop with isohunt? Why not hold google responsible for letting me find torrent sites? Why not hold schools responsible for teaching me how to search for things on the internet? Why not hold dell responsible for letting me run files I shouldn't?

Re:Who's fault is it? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17647738)

Errr, dude. Do you realize the site is called "isohunt" ?

Re:Who's fault is it? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17647814)

Careful, best to not give them any ideas (they tend not to think on their own).

Re:Who's fault is it? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17648108)

"Why not hold dell responsible for letting me run files I shouldn't?"

Um, you should google "Trusted Computing"... unless your school will get in trouble :)

Re:Who's fault is it? (3, Insightful)

nomadic (141991) | more than 7 years ago | (#17648130)

Its frustrating to see sites take the fall for things that aren't their fault. Holding isoHunt responsible for people downloading illegal content is stupid.

They created the site specifically to allow people to download illegal content. And, with the ads, they profited from it.

Whack a Taco (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17647474)

This is a story we've heard before with other sites, only serving to further demonstrate that playing wack a mole with torrent aggregators isn't the solution to anything.

It doesn't demonstrate anything of the sort. This is a meaningless comment. You put one up, they have it taken down. It's a war. This is a battle. The copyright holders are losing but apparently that's a good thing.

You're damned right... (4, Informative)

zappepcs (820751) | more than 7 years ago | (#17647776)

The copyright holders are losing, not because TPB or ISOHunt will always pop back up, but because they are trusting the business and revenue to a group of people who are whole heartedly working overtime to ruin their business. The **AA are subhumans (more or less) who are trying to create a supply and demand situation where the demand is greater than the supply by choking off all supplies but their own. This is typically termed manipulating the market in most circles, but they have paid the lawmakers to make it look legal.

The only people who will continue to lose out in big ways are the content creators who sell their copyrights to big business like the **AAs of the world. Right now, we are seeing the beginning of content creators starting to distribute their products without the help of the **AAs of the world, and its working. The more that happens, and the more that we, the people with a clue, name the companies responsible for bad laws, jacked up prices, market manipulation... the more chance there is of John Q Public understanding what is happening and voting appropriately.

So, who is responsible? Sony? No, there are way more than a few. Here is the RIAAs board of directors:

Polly Anthony Geffen Records
Mitch Bainwol RIAA
Glen Barros Concord Records
Steve Bartels Island Records
Victoria Bassetti EMI Recorded Music
Jose Behar Universal Music Group
Tim Bowen SONY BMG
Bob Cavallo Buena Vista Music
Mike Curb Curb Records
Joe Galante SONY BMG
Ivan Gavin EMI Recorded Music
Charles Goldstuck RCA Music Group
Zach Horowitz Universal Music Group
Dave Johnson Warner Music Group
Craig Kallman The Atlantic Group
Lawrence Kenswil Universal Music Group
Michael Koch Koch Entertainment
Mel Lewinter Universal Music Group
Kevin Liles Warner Music Group
Alan Meltzer Wind-up Records
Deirdre McDonald SONY BMG
David Munns EMI Recorded Music
Jason Flom Virgin Records America
Tom Silverman Tommy Boy Records
Andy Slater Capitol Records
Rob Stringer SONY BMG
Tom Whalley Warner Bros. Records

http://www.riaa.com/about/leadership/board.asp [riaa.com] Board of directors

If you want to know if someone's music is safe from **AA, try http://www.riaaradar.com/ [riaaradar.com]

I am certain that there are plenty of other resource on the Internet as well. So, lets all join together and try to make sure that content creators understand what the **AAs are doing to their business... namely killing it and any chance of real revenue.

Re:You're damned right... (2, Insightful)

nomadic (141991) | more than 7 years ago | (#17647960)

The **AA are subhumans (more or less)

I think that's a dangerous, counterproductive way to phrase it. Just because you disagree with their philosophy, or think that they're greedy or evil, doesn't make them less than human. That's a very dangerous game that historically led to very bad results.

Re:You're damned right... (4, Insightful)

cliffski (65094) | more than 7 years ago | (#17648476)

"The **AA are subhumans (more or less) who are trying to create a supply and demand situation where the demand is greater than the supply by choking off all supplies but their own"

Oh dear. you REALLY think that statement is true?
firstly, they are not 'subhuman'. secondly, there is nothing preventing you going home right now, writing some music or making an amateur movie, and releasing it free on the web. The fact that you don't bother, but would rather make illegal copies of other peoples work instead, speaks volumes about the issue. They are not restricting the supply of entertainment. not even vaguely.

If you really gave a damn about the issue, you would avoid *evil RIAA* content entirely and stick to free content, or purchase your content directly from the content creators. Either way, downloading hollywood movies from isohunt makes their point, not yours.

TorrentBox? (1)

Grey Ninja (739021) | more than 7 years ago | (#17647492)

I visited Torrentbox earlier today, and got a VERY similar message to that described in the article. Are they ran by the same people? If so, I really didn't know that. Torrentbox was my tracker of choice, but I still have to say that despite its issues, I really like torrentspy for searching. So I'm still good.

May not be intended to be a solution (1, Interesting)

Fastolfe (1470) | more than 7 years ago | (#17647494)

If the **AA thinks that infringement is occurring, but they take no steps to try and shut down some of the infringement, it's easy to say, "If this was harming you so much, why didn't you try to stop them?" I don't think anyone is naive enough to think that these measures will permanently knock out a lot of these sites, but when it comes to proving your case, it's the effort that counts.

Re:May not be intended to be a solution (3, Informative)

Abcd1234 (188840) | more than 7 years ago | (#17647820)

but when it comes to proving your case, it's the effort that counts.

No, it's not. Copyright is not like trademarks. They don't run out if you don't enforce them. And the only evidence you need to convinct someone is proof they infringed. Past enforcement efforts have no bearing.

So all these guys are doing is harrassing people and making themselves look worse. Is there a better solution? I don't know. But it's pretty clear that the shotgun lawsuit approach simply doesn't work.

Re:May not be intended to be a solution (2, Insightful)

Fastolfe (1470) | more than 7 years ago | (#17648210)

If your case revolves around proving that you were harmed (as all civil cases do), then it does matter. What does it say when you have 10 people infringing your copyrights, and you single one of them out and claim that they're causing you irreparable harm, while the other 9 are doing the same thing? The harm must not be that severe, right? This will impact your ability to make your case and the ultimate compensation you receive.

I don't get it. (2, Interesting)

prelelat (201821) | more than 7 years ago | (#17647496)

They get turned off in the US so they move to Canada how is that proving a point instead of moving to Sweden or some other country where it isn't sketchy. Is it that they just got a good offer from Canada or are they trying to jump ship from the states.

Wouldn't a bigger statment be to stay in the states cause that seems ot me what they are trying to do.

It just seems somewhat contradictory to move from the States to Canada and then say we won't move to Sweeden because its too easy?

Re:I don't get it. (1, Insightful)

dave420 (699308) | more than 7 years ago | (#17647856)

If they stayed in Ameeeeerica, they'd get instafucked by the **AA. I imagine they're moving to Canaaada to get around that. Or at least delay it. Or for poutines.

Re:I don't get it. (1)

delinear (991444) | more than 7 years ago | (#17647926)

I think the argument runs that, as they're not doing anything illegal (they don't even host torrents, just index other people's - data that is probably readily available from Google/Yahoo/MSN if you went looking), they shouldn't have to move to a country where file-sharing is legally permitted. As a search aggregator rather than a file-sharer, they believe they should be allowed to operate in the US, but since they are being denied that ability, they have chosen to move to a country with similar laws and make a stand there, rather than one which makes them look guilty.

Re:I don't get it. (1)

WidescreenFreak (830043) | more than 7 years ago | (#17647962)

Look at the way they phrased it (emphasis mine) -- "BitTorrent was created for legitimate distribution of large media files, and we stand by that philosophy". It appears to me that they are doing everything that they can to keep BitTorrent as legitimate as possible in the eyes of the public while getting out from under the jurisdiction (if that's what you'd call it) of the RIAA and MPAA. Because Sweden is probably known best in BitTorrent circles for its loose copyright policy (aka. "allowing piracy"), moving to a Swedish ISP would give the *AA more ammunition to try to demonize BitTorrent as a pirate's haven, and it would appear that IsoHunt is trying desperately not to give the *AA that ammunition.

Just my 2/100 of a U.S. dollar. Convert to your currency as necessary.

Re:I don't get it. (1)

shark72 (702619) | more than 7 years ago | (#17648266)

"It appears to me that they are doing everything that they can to keep BitTorrent as legitimate as possible in the eyes of the public..."

No, sites like LegalTorrents [legaltorrents.com] and even BitTorrent.com itself [bittorrent.com] are "doing everything they can." ISOHunt puts absolutely no effort into maintaining legitimacy; when you visit a tracker site and see that the top stuff mirrors the top ten movies, CDs and games, it's pretty clear that the owners care not one whit about being "legitimate." Plus, the name "ISOHunt" is a pretty poor choice if you're trying to specialize in legal torrents.

If they had wanted to create a tracker for "legimate" content, they could have. Others have. But there's very little money in that business model. There's money in piracy, so that's the direction they chose.

Re:I don't get it. (2, Informative)

tlhIngan (30335) | more than 7 years ago | (#17648112)

They get turned off in the US so they move to Canada how is that proving a point instead of moving to Sweden or some other country where it isn't sketchy. Is it that they just got a good offer from Canada or are they trying to jump ship from the states.

Wouldn't a bigger statment be to stay in the states cause that seems ot me what they are trying to do.

It just seems somewhat contradictory to move from the States to Canada and then say we won't move to Sweeden because its too easy?


I believe the basic reason is the creator of IsoHunt is well, Canadian, and lives in Greater Vancouver (BC). I seem to recall many newspaper articles about IsoHunt and how it's irking copyright people. Basically, I was wondering what purpose there was having a newspaper (one of the two pay dailies, but I think it might've been in both) print that, and now *everyone* knows about IsoHunt.

The articles never seemed to imply it was doing something illegal, just that it was a search engine that *could* be used to find pirated movies and stuff on other sites, but not actually hosting any illegal content. (Unless lists of file hashes and URLs are illegal?)

Re:I don't get it. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17648228)

Because they, the people running it, are Canadian?

Re:I don't get it. (2, Interesting)

DrBdan (987477) | more than 7 years ago | (#17648418)

Back in May 2006 CBC News (a Canadian network) did a piece on how IsoHunt was being sued (Google "cbc news isohunt" if you want to read it). The owner is actually a Canadian living in Canada, so the switch to a Canadian ISP could just be as simple as him deciding that since his US ISP dropped him he might as well go with something local.

Canada (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17647522)

They plan on moving ISPs from the US to Canada

It seems like the U.S. has become Canada's ugly sister. I don't think that Canada's changed much, but it just keeps looking better...

Re:Canada (2, Funny)

Archangel Michael (180766) | more than 7 years ago | (#17647694)

So, if you make a move on your sister, isn't that incest? Ewwww

Punishing the wrong ones (1)

ErGalvao (843384) | more than 7 years ago | (#17647536)

Actually this is part of the (wrong) principle that the website owner is automatically guilt for anything that is stored/announced/published there. People like the folks of MPAA just put the guilt in people they CAN disturb.

The real responsibility for content/files/etc... published on a website is on the publisher, not on the site itself, but this is obvious... or should be anyways. Problem is MPAA, RIAA and alike know that it's too hard to grab a user, so they just sue the service owner, making the very idea of aggregating any kind of content a real nightmare for anyone.

Re:Punishing the wrong ones (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17648592)

This was the same argument that arose during the Napster lawsuits; that the RIAA/MPAA should focus their efforts not on the aggregators of the infringing material but rather on the suppliers. But the RIAA/MPAA are also actively seeking out the suppliers as well. That is all of those lawsuits where John Doe with IP x.x.x.x is subpoenaed and it ends up being a grandmother or some kid somewhere. It's considered just as unpopular and gets constantly criticized on Slashdot.

The reality is that the RIAA/MPAA are not going to stop attempting to protect their material. Even as they move to offer more technically friendly solutions they will always fight to keep the piracy levels as managable as possible, as they should. It is well within their right to decide how their material is to be published. The reality also is that regardless of the services available and proper laws followed there will be a segment of the population, represented in greater numbers by the Slashdot and FOSS crowd, that decry the actions of the RIAA/MPAA regardless of what they may be and will continue to illegally attempt to acquire any media they desire when they desire it.

I love this rationale... (1)

carvalhao (774969) | more than 7 years ago | (#17647590)

IANAL, but if linking to something that may be illegal is illegal, I suppose that linking to IsoHunt is also illegal. That would include Google and other search engines. And if all citizens are equal from a legal standpoint, isn't suing IsoHunt and not Google liable to be labeled persecution?

Re:I love this rationale... (1)

shark72 (702619) | more than 7 years ago | (#17647760)

"And if all citizens are equal from a legal standpoint, isn't suing IsoHunt and not Google liable to be labeled persecution?"

You've been to IsoHunt, right? You understand their purpose, their business model, and so on?

For those of you who really don't see the difference, a good place to start is intent [wikipedia.org] . Nota bene that when the folks at IsoHunt used the "legitimate distribution" phrase, they were being ironic.

Re:I love this rationale... (1)

delinear (991444) | more than 7 years ago | (#17648016)

I'm sure the **AAs would love to sue Google if they thought for a second they could get away with it. Unfortunately for them, Google has a little more financial clout to fight it's corner, and as we've seen in the past, the **AAs are a little shy of fighting battles they aren't sure they'll win (the last thing they want is to go to court and end up setting a legal precedent saying that these aggregators are fine and above board...)

Cost for **AA (1)

pipatron (966506) | more than 7 years ago | (#17647606)

Just imagine the sum of the cost for **AA because of all directors, lawyers, PR-people etc that has to sit hours after hours in meetings about how to act on these "evil torrent-sites". Then smile.

a Rose by any other name is still full of crap (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17647628)

I think it's great that everyone sits here and is like "you're all greedy you evil record companies"...lol...you're all just a bunch of looters. torrents are just the hurricane katrina of the internet. If we're all going to enjoy in the fact that technology has created more loopholes than can be closed by the giant companies we shouldn't be fake about it. you're all just faking this self righteous attitude like you've been wronged by companies who dump millions into developing software or music or movies. That, combined with the spite you have for movie stars who make big salaries makes you sing songs of how right you are for stealing. If you're complaining about the cost of software, well then don't buy it, anyone who's taken a simple econ course understands supply and demand. A product is worth what people will pay for it, not what you think it should cost. If you don't like it, go find an open source solution free solution or write the program yourself. But c'mon guys, don't act like you're not all just looting till the internet cops get to the scene, b/c that's really all that 98% of us are doing.

Re:a Rose by any other name is still full of crap (5, Interesting)

Quiet_Desperation (858215) | more than 7 years ago | (#17647762)

torrents are just the hurricane katrina of the internet.

Cripes, I *WISH* torrents had that sort of speed. :-\

BTW, I fully admit to being a looter. I know the law. I just don't give a shit. In a world where our government is selling us out to another country, where illegal aliens are given more rights than citizens, where some soccer dude can get handed a quarter of a -*BILLION*- dollars for playing a game, why should I be a nice little nobody who follows all the rules? Fuck all that. It's every man for himself from this point on.

Re:a Rose by any other name is still full of crap (2, Insightful)

pipatron (966506) | more than 7 years ago | (#17647788)

If you're complaining about the cost of software, well then don't buy it

I thought that's what we are accused of? Not buying, that is.

anyone who's taken a simple econ course understands supply and demand

Did you take one of those courses yourself? The cost of a product generally follows the simple equation demand / supply. When supply is infinite, as it is when you can copy something with zero effort without affecting the original, the cost approach zero. In order to be able to extort the consumers in paying a lot more than the products are worth, there are lobbied laws in place to force an artificial scarcity of the product.

Re:a Rose by any other name is still full of crap (1)

shark72 (702619) | more than 7 years ago | (#17648152)

"When supply is infinite, as it is when you can copy something with zero effort without affecting the original, the cost approach zero."

Come on; you know that demand isn't infinite, and that costs are recovered only if the product sells. The supply/demand curve is still very much at play, even with products where the cost of sale is inordinately larger than the cost of production.

While it could be that you're simply smarter than those morons at Adobe, and that they haven't done their due diligence in setting pricing; it's pretty doubtful. Quoting Econ 101 stuff won't change the fact that Adobe has a nice, shiny building, and that there are a hell of a lot more PhotoShop users than The Gimp users, despite the fact that the latter is free.

Re:a Rose by any other name is still full of crap (4, Insightful)

UnknownSoldier (67820) | more than 7 years ago | (#17648534)

What tripe. Copy != Stealing.

Copyright is an arbitrary ARTIFICIAL law -- whose time has come and past. Why is illegal? Because the government says so; and who creates the government? The people, and the people clearely are showing that it's an archaic hold-over when information was a scarce commodity.

Sharing is caring. That's the best kind of (free) advertising you can get!

Cheers

What they DIDN'T say... (2, Insightful)

shark72 (702619) | more than 7 years ago | (#17647640)

"BitTorrent was created for legitimate distribution of large media files, and we stand by that philosophy as a search engine and aggregator."

"...and at the same time, we know that 99% of what our customers are looking for is pirated, and we've made handsome advertising revenue. We'd like to keep making money off of the huge demand for piracy -- it's not like copyright owners have a monopoly on the concept of 'greed', you know -- so we're going to keep doing it, and keep throwing around that 'legitimate distribution' phrase, just because we enjoy the irony."

At least TPB is a little more honest and straightforward in their goals. "legitimate distribution." Right, that's exactly what the typical isohunt customer is after, and that's exactly why they were purportedly sued by copyright holders. All that "legitimate distribution."

Re:What they DIDN'T say... (1)

BenoitRen (998927) | more than 7 years ago | (#17647982)

Exactly. The website's name, IsoHunt, is a dead give-away as to what the site's real purpose is.

Re:What they DIDN'T say... (1)

LWATCDR (28044) | more than 7 years ago | (#17648086)

First thing I thought of from the name is can I find Linux Distro ISOs.
I haven't ever downloaded an ISO that wasn't legit.

Wack (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17647648)

playing wack a mole with torrent aggregators isn't the solution to anything.
Doesn't that depend on how hard you wack? Interview the wacked mole and see which thing he says:
  • "It sucked. The hoster killed my website and it took me a week to get it back up. They ruined my uptime."
  • "It sucked. I had to sell my car to pay my legal bills. They ruined my life."

Re:Wack (1)

delinear (991444) | more than 7 years ago | (#17648232)

Except the GP was referring to the fact that you whack one mole and another one appears. Or two. Or fifty. It doesn't matter how hard that first mole got whacked, there will always be more moles. Sure, some moles might think twice about the risk of being whacked, but others will see an opportunity and take it. Nobody cares if the first mole was left with a headache or went splat, the whacking is a pointless exercise in the long term, enough people have already gone through this and been replaced to show the truth of that.

The more the **AAs whack, the more people will look for a water-tight loophole (forcing through a case establishing legal precedent protecting aggregator sites? Moving to a country where sharing isn't prohibited? Buying Sealand...), and if they happen to find one it will be too late for the **AAs to offer to play nicely. They should be getting these people on board and looking at ways to make their business model work with these sites, not against them. But like most people who rely on whacking things to provide answers, they're not noted for thinking things through...

Is anyone suprised? (2, Interesting)

cliffski (65094) | more than 7 years ago | (#17647656)

I hadn't heard of that torrent site, but just as a test I googled this:
"king kong torrent"
try it, and check out the top links (the top two are from isohunt)
That was just the first hollywood movie that popped into my head.
It may well be that isohunt carried a lot of perfectly legal torrents, but any torrent site that carries a huge amount of copyrighted stuff is going to be attacked by the people owning the copyright. If you really want to support legal p2p, you need to make damn sure your site is absolutely rigorous when it comes to filtering out illegal content.

In an ideal world, the anti-DRM, pro p2p crowd would be the very people who were actively moderating sites like these and keeping them clean of illegal content. As it is, nobody is going to take seriously any claims about such sites being mostly for legal use.

Re:Is anyone suprised? (1)

Secrity (742221) | more than 7 years ago | (#17647866)

I don't think you found what you were looking for.

The links you found were for Kong: King of Atlantis; which was not exactly a blockbuster movie.

Re:Is anyone suprised? (2, Insightful)

pipatron (966506) | more than 7 years ago | (#17647894)

In an ideal world, the anti-DRM, pro p2p crowd would be the very people who were actively moderating sites like these and keeping them clean of illegal content.

In the pro-piracy crowd, there are no illegal content. If you buy a CD or a DVD, it's yours and you should be able to do what you please with the information.

Re:Is anyone suprised? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17648082)

then they are morons. Just because I pay 10.99 to buy a DVD of The Fellowship of the Ring, doesn't give me equal rights to distribute that movie as the guys who took 3 hard years of their lives slaving over making the thing.
To think it does just shows you to be deluded, or trying to justify taking other peoples stuff. You might succeed in fooling yourself, but nobody else.

Re:Is anyone suprised? (1, Interesting)

Findeton (818988) | more than 7 years ago | (#17648308)

In an ideal world, the anti-DRM, pro p2p crowd would be the very people who were actively moderating sites like these and keeping them clean of illegal content. As it is, nobody is going to take seriously any claims about such sites being mostly for legal use.

Who fukin' cares if it's "legal"! PIRACY IS RIGHT. What this peple calls "piracy" is not boarding ships... instead, they are talking about... sharing culture between peers! And, my friend, it doesn't matter if that's been banned on your country (here in Spain is absolutely legal), morally speaking, "piracy" is not wrong, moreover, "piracy" is possitive and should be encouraged.

I know it's not legal anymore in your country, but that does only mean that your politicians suck more then ours on this subject, and that you should struggle to get it back your RIGHTS. Yes, i'm talking about "piracy"(sharing culture between peers) as a right. We've got the right to pirate in Spain, and if you think our culture has died because of that, then think again! You americans have been taken away one of your rights, and everyone knows that maintaining your rights is easier than taking them back.. that means you have to struggle on this fight even more.

Bullshit Taco... (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#17647682)

"This is a story we've heard before with other sites, only serving to further demonstrate that playing wack a mole with torrent aggregators isn't the solution to anything."

What is it? You get pissed off when they go after the aggregators and hypocrically say Go After The Individual Pirates, and when they do, you scream I CAN'T BELIEVE THEY ARE GOING AFTER SINGLE MOTHERS!!! WHAT BASTARDS!!! IT ONLY GOES TO PROVE THAT COPYRIGHT DOESN'T WORK!!!

So WTF is it? Go after aggregators or go after the pirates? And its funny, no matter who they go after, the Copyright Doesn't Work mantra is thrown in as proof...

I'm sorry, you don't have a right to software or media that wasn't given to you legitimately. These ISO sites are purely there to provide pirated software and rarely anything more. You know it, the owners know it and the people searching there know it. Sure, there MIGHT be a few legal items...I've seen this site before come up when I was looking for CC'd media, but almost always surrounding it was hundreds of others that were obviously not Creative Commons in origin.

So which is it? State your preference for the record? Do you believe folks should be able to profit off their hard work, or should those of us that provide intellectual properties for a living be marginalized for your 'greater good'. This was one of the reasons I left a profitable realm where I worked in the creative field for hard cold gov't paid for science...at least here I can pretend I'm doing it for the greater good while getting screwed by both my employer and the industry.

I'm posting this semi-anonymously because my beliefs do not reflect my employers beliefs and I really don't want to connect the two (or alter my sig).

--clif

Re:Bullshit Taco... (1)

cliffski (65094) | more than 7 years ago | (#17647906)

well said. The pseudo intellectual gibberish spouted on slashdot about how 'information should be free' is always peddled by those who don't generate that information or content in the first place. In other words, leechers.

Re:Bullshit Taco... (1)

sqrt(2) (786011) | more than 7 years ago | (#17648150)

For record; I just don't care.

Catastrophic failure, disaster recovery (1)

Colin Smith (2679) | more than 7 years ago | (#17647710)

Mirrored systems, distributed information blah blah.

No sympathy, at all. It's entirely possible to install a system which would withstand a nuclear attack and continue running, hell, these days it's even cheap to do it. If it really mattered to them they could have put a system in which the MPAA couldn't stop running. This is really just a story of inept system planning.

 

Timing (1)

clickclickdrone (964164) | more than 7 years ago | (#17647782)

Interesting that this happened within a day or so of the first HD DVD hitting the torrents.

DMCA (1)

lpcustom (579886) | more than 7 years ago | (#17647810)

A friend of mine got a DMCA letter from NBC regarding a torrent he was on for a movie owned by them. The torrent was listed on isohunt.com. This came three days ago. The site is a torrent search engine. That's all. It is stupid and wasteful for the RIAA or MPAA to go after a site like this. Google provides the same information, you don't see them getting shut down. I'd guess that it has something to do with how much Google is worth. I wonder if recording artists and movie makers are losing more money from people pirating their stuff or from all the wasteful legal battles the MPAA and RIAA keep losing?

How funny... (2, Insightful)

Sfing_ter (99478) | more than 7 years ago | (#17648034)

the **AA are still gormless [urbandictionary.com] twits, this is like shutting down the nfl by getting rid of individual players... the frameworks by which these sites run exist on a plane they do not nor could they ever understand with their antiquated ideas of "how things are". Their reality is gone and good riddance. The truth is, had they labels jumped in and started the selling their shit on-line immediately, they would have had loyal customers, but now they have made adversaries of the very people they need to stay alive.

Please, someone bitch-slap them off the planet, they really annoy me... perhaps to the same planet the buggy-whip makers are on...

Hydra (3, Insightful)

slasho81 (455509) | more than 7 years ago | (#17648058)

Shutting down a large torrent site is a flawed strategy because it forces users to look up alternatives, strengthening many other sites. It's like a hydra. You cut off one head seven other heads grow back.

Okay then (1)

kentrel (526003) | more than 7 years ago | (#17648290)

What is the solution? No MPAA\piracy bashing... just some constructive ideas. Anyone have any?

Re:Okay then (1)

shotgunefx (239460) | more than 7 years ago | (#17648598)

Adjust the price point to where the majority of people who pirate won't bother.

I'm guessing that more often than not people are downloading for the following reasons.

Price.
Convienence (I missed last night's Office, or a movie that won't be out for months)

So make it cheaper, and make it more convienent and everyone wins. The problem is not just that they are trying to prevent theft, the *AAs are trying to kill fair use at the same time.

Their endpoint has nothing to do with pirating (or very little), it's so that you can never own anything. They want to change the deal and make it so that whenever you want to do anything with it, you have to pay again. Turning ownership into subscription, much as Divx (the player, not the codec).

On top of this, they use their clout to get us to pay for it! All of this technology geared at taking away what we already have, the price is coming directly out of our pockets, whether you watch movies a ton of movies, or not at all.

wack a mole (1)

nurb432 (527695) | more than 7 years ago | (#17648530)

Aside from being somewhat ineffective, it also tends to get you air time. More people hear about what is going on and want to join in.

This is what happened with Napster in the beginning. Few 'average' people knew what the entire download 'scene' was until the RIAA drug their butts to court, and then the nightly news. "wow, i can download music on that internet thing.. where do i sign up".

I also think the extra press it generated had a lot to do with the inital movement of the mp3 player industry in general. oops :)

Their new ISP in Toronto, Canada (3, Informative)

ylikone (589264) | more than 7 years ago | (#17648586)

Their new ISP is in Toronto and it's called NeutralData.com [neutraldata.com] . So will they not get a lawsuit slapped on them by the RIAA/MPAA even if they are in Canada?

Move to Sealand before is to late! (1)

chord.wav (599850) | more than 7 years ago | (#17648596)

Sealand is salvation!! Move to Sealand now before it's too late! I'm building my own Arc with the purpose to leave with 2 copies of each copyrighted piece of work to Sealand. If you really care about your copyrighted material, send a copy to me. Mail me to arrange the details. No child porn please.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?