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!

Four Indicted in Pirate Bay Case

Zonk posted more than 6 years ago | from the yo-ho-yo-ho-a-pirate's-life-for-awwww dept.

The Courts 709

paulraps writes "Suddenly the founders of the Pirate Bay are not so hearty. The four men behind the popular file-sharing site were indicted in Sweden on Thursday on charges of being accessories to breaking copyright law. And this is more than just a shot across the bows. The prosecutor reckons that they can be hooked for 'promoting other people's copyright breaches' but there will be no walking the plank: instead, they face fines of up to $200,000 and the confiscation of all their hardware. 'The Swedish prosecutor listed dozens of works that had been downloaded through The Pirate Bay site, including The Beatles' Let It Be, Robbie Williams' Intensive Care and the movie Harry Potter & The Goblet of Fire. Plaintiffs in the case include Warner, MGM, Columbia Pictures, 20th Century Fox Films, Sony BMG, Universal and EMI.'"

cancel ×

709 comments

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

Jews (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22245922)

Fucking hook-nosed Jews are always going after the common man.

Re:Jews (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22246380)

Vote Ron Paul.

Racists fucknuts of the world unite.

8 out of 10 racist stupid braindead moronic idiots [stormfront.org] agree, Ron Paul for president.

The opposition made their homework this time (5, Insightful)

bigmouth_strikes (224629) | more than 6 years ago | (#22245926)

This is a really interesting case, since the recording industry association and lobby (Ifpi and Antipiratbyrån) seems to have made their homework this time. This case will probably go all the way to the supreme court or even to the european court and both sides seem to be well prepared for this showdown.

The interesting argument brought up is that the defendants are in this to make money, and the prosecutor says he can prove elaborate plans to split the quite hefty incomes from advertising that the Pirate Bay is raking in. While linking to copyrighted material may be legal, making money from actively enabling people copyright infringement probably is harder to sneak by the courts.

Done their homework? (0, Redundant)

Moryath (553296) | more than 6 years ago | (#22246026)

Lessee... prosecutor bribed off by MafiAA companies. Check.
Judge who authorized raids on flimsy pretenses after being bribed off by MafiAA companies. Check.
Police who did raids on flimsy pretenses after being bribed off by MafiAA companies. Check.

Corrupt MafiAA industry that ought to be put out of its misery: Check.

The interesting argument brought up is that the defendants are in this to make money, and the prosecutor says he can prove elaborate plans to split the quite hefty incomes from advertising that the Pirate Bay is raking in. While linking to copyrighted material may be legal, making money from actively enabling people copyright infringement probably is harder to sneak by the courts.

Rephrase:
The interesting argument brought up is that the bribed prosecutors and MafiAA are in this to make money by hook or by crook (preferably crook), and the defendants can prove the MafiAA have elaborate plans to split the quite hefty incomes they make using illegal tactics like price fixing while leaving the actual artists with precisely two things: Jack and Shit. While linking to copyrighted material may be legal, making money by defrauding the public, engaging in monopolistic price gouging, and fraudulently cooking the books to deny money to the artists ought to be harder to sneak by the courts.

Re:Done their homework? (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22246238)

Rephrase:

The blindingly obvious facts are that the people using TPB torrents clearly value all of the media that those ZOMG EEVIL FASCIST MAFIAA BULLY BOYS are creating, because they're downloading it at a rate of terabytes per day. As their products aren't necessary to life and are clearly for entertainment value, all of your whiny, breast-beating claims of ZOMZOMG PRICE-FIXING DEFRAUDING FRAUDITUDE amount to exactly JACK fucking SHIT. You don't need their products to live, you just want to have them for free and then want to whine that your precious freedoms are being ripped from you when you can no longer gank them under the guise of YAAARGH DIGITAL FREEDOMZ FOR TEH TRUE ARTISTZ!

Re:Done their homework? (0, Flamebait)

Hassman (320786) | more than 6 years ago | (#22246252)

You people drive me crazy.

Is the MPAA evil? yes.
Is the RIAA evil? yes.
Is downloading movies and songs illegal? yes.

But you're right. Pirate Bay has done nothing wrong. Sure they haven't. I'm sure they make 0 money off their site. They just want to 'stick it to the man'.

Listen, I haven't bought a song in a store for about 8 or 9 years now. I buy from sites and labels where I know the artists aren't being screwed over (typically non-mainstream artists, some really good music out there that is probably never heard in the masses). And yes, I have illegally downloaded music and movies before. I use the if I like it, I'll most likely buy it defense there...however, that makes it no less illegal. If I get caught, I'm boned like anyone else.

The fact of the matter is there are ways of putting the RIAA and what not out of business, or insight them to change their ways using legal methods. It may take a while, but we're starting to see the fruits of our labor. If they don't change their business model, they will be the ones boned.

But no matter how evil they are, copyright infringement is still copyright infringement. Why don't you write a song or book or create a painting, and I'll copy it. Lets see how quick you change your tune.

Re:Done their homework? (0, Offtopic)

networkBoy (774728) | more than 6 years ago | (#22246454)

While it's admittedly not a lot it does represent many many hours of work (hundreds actually), and, in fact several xboxes were partially disassembled for the component library:
xbx.networkboy.net [slashdot.org]
I make that site free of charge.

Re:Done their homework? (0, Offtopic)

networkBoy (774728) | more than 6 years ago | (#22246492)

hooray for the url: tag's innate mangling ability of anything without www or http leading it....

proper link [networkboy.net]

Re:Done their homework? (1)

djmurdoch (306849) | more than 6 years ago | (#22246506)

Is downloading movies and songs illegal? yes.

That really depends on where you live. In Canada, it's likely true about movies but not about songs because of the private copying right. Other places also have a private copying right. Sweden has some sort of private copying right, but I don't know if it applies to downloading movies or songs.

Re:Done their homework? (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22246590)

Is downloading movies and songs illegal? yes.

NO. NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO!

UPLOADING *copyrighted* movies and songs *which you don't have the copyright holder's permission to distribute* is illegal.

Re:Done their homework? (5, Insightful)

Vexorian (959249) | more than 6 years ago | (#22246602)

Is downloading movies and songs illegal? yes.
No, it isn't , and I don't really understand how some sort of statement got such high moderation points. It isn't illegal to download movies and songs. It might be a civil crime to download copyrighted songs and movies, and though even that varies country to country, it is still a civil, non-penal issue.

Why don't you write a song or book or create a painting, and I'll copy it. Lets see how quick you change your tune.
I know guys who write songs and paintings on creative commons terms and I've seen thousands of GNU documentation - licensed books.

Re:Done their homework? (4, Informative)

bigmouth_strikes (224629) | more than 6 years ago | (#22246256)

While you seem to be under the impression that the prosecutor, police and whole judicial system are running errands for the recording industry, only 15 cases of copyright infringement via file sharing were investigated in Sweden last year. So bribes or no bribes, it's not exactly a systematic witch hunt.

Do you have any facts - not speculations - supporting that any prosecutor, judge or police took bribes from the recording industry or its lobby groups ? I very much doubt that.

Re:Done their homework? (1)

asdfgl (891883) | more than 6 years ago | (#22246410)

In the swedish judicial system judges do exactly what the title implies, they judge. That is on check off the list. The prosecutor is the one who authorizes the police to do raids.

The upside of this system is that you get no appearent benefit from bribing the judge. The downside is that you only have to bribe the prosecutor once for raiding and opening a prosecution...

Re:The opposition made their homework this time (2, Insightful)

russ1337 (938915) | more than 6 years ago | (#22246038)

to split the quite hefty incomes from advertising that the Pirate Bay is raking in.
If the sums are that hefty, why aren't Hollywood doing it?

Re:The opposition made their homework this time (1)

Mantaar (1139339) | more than 6 years ago | (#22246168)

If the sums are that hefty, why aren't Hollywood doing it?
Hollywood? Hollywood are making quite hefty sums from ads and everything else (though usually they'll ad for themselves). In fact, they are the ones that have the money to lobby the Swedish administration into suing the operators of one of the worlds most visited websites.

Dangerous Nonsense. (3, Insightful)

gnutoo (1154137) | more than 6 years ago | (#22246136)

You must believe that there's something wrong with sharing. You can talk about money and laws the industry has made up, but you are ultimately recommending control and censorship of the internet. Freedom for all should trump the ability of a few to make money through obsolete publication models. Really, how impressed should I be that fifty year old media is available on the internet? The case would be laughable [slashdot.org] if it did not have the potential to do so much harm.

Re:Dangerous Nonsense. (1, Troll)

cliffski (65094) | more than 6 years ago | (#22246342)

If you meet me for lunch and I have a side order of fries, and tell you to help yourself, that's sharing.

if I go out to work each day and work my ass off to make movies, and you go work as a plumber, and then I see you watch the movies I work at for free, yet expect me to pay you if you do some plumbing, then that isn't sharing, its called 'freeloading' or 'leeching'.

But any sensible discussion about the moral rights to other peoples hard work here is fruitless. Someone has already been modded up for using the term 'MAFIAA', so its all downhill hero-worship of TPB from here on.

Re:Dangerous Nonsense. (5, Insightful)

Thanshin (1188877) | more than 6 years ago | (#22246604)

if I go out to work each day and work my ass off to make movies, and you go work as a plumber, and then I see you watch the movies I work at for free, yet expect me to pay you if you do some plumbing, then that isn't sharing, its called 'freeloading' or 'leeching'.
If I work one day as a cop for you and you pay me 100$ and then you work the same day singing a song and ask for 1,000,000$ rest assured I'll try to find a way of not paying you what you don't deserve.

And when I find that way, when you start whining that your predecessors were able to take much more money from mine than you do from me, I won't care.

Re:Dangerous Nonsense. (1)

bigmouth_strikes (224629) | more than 6 years ago | (#22246364)

Below is the list of the copyrighted materials that the people behind The Pirate Bay are being sued for having helped being infringed upon.

At the time of the raid against TPB, most of these weren't even 2 years old I reckon. So even though I agree with the sentiment that "fifty year old media" probably should be available for free for the common good, I fail to see what your statement has to do with the pertaining issue.

Music:
  Backyard Babies record "Stockholm Syndrome"
  Joakim Thåströms record "Skebokvarnsv 209"
  Sophi Solmans record "A decade of Dreams"
  Emilia de Porets "A lifteime in a moment"
  Advance Patrols record "Aposteln"
  Amy Diamonds record "This is me now"
  Håkan Hellströms record "Nåt gammalt, nått nytt, nått lånat, nåt blått"
  Kents record "The hjärta & smärta EP"
  Lena Philipssons record "Han jobbar i affär"
  Max Peezays record "Discokommittén"
  Per Gessles record "Son of a plummer"
  Petters skivor "Mitt sjätte sinne", "Ronin" "Bananrepubliken" och "Petter"
  Snooks record "Snook, svett och tårar"
  Cardigans record "Don't blame your daughter"
  Cornelis record "Till sist"
  Robbie Williams "Intensive care"
  Beatles record "Let it be"
  Rasmus record "Hide from the sun"
  James Blunts record "Back to bedlam"
  Coldplays record "X&Y"
  David Bowies record "Reality"

Movies:
  "Den svaga punkten"
  "Afrikanen"
  "Pusher 3"
  "Mastermind"
  "Harry Potter & the goblet of fire"
  "The Pink Panther"
  "Prison Break, season I"
  "Syriana"
  "Walk the line"

Games:
  "Diablo 2"
  "World of warcraft-Invasion"
  "F.E.A.R."
  "Call of Duty 2"

Re:The opposition made their homework this time (1)

mwvdlee (775178) | more than 6 years ago | (#22246374)

making money from actively enabling people copyright infringement probably is harder to sneak by the courts

Microsoft is screwed if this is true.
Afterall, how many of those downloaders and uploaders were using Windows to do so?
Windows enabled them to do so, and Microsoft is making money off of it!

How does one "actively enable" by the way?

The opposition made their napster this time (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22246478)

Well I predict the usual comments from slashdotters. But I recommend people read the Napster case first before commenting because apparently no one has learned anything from that case.

Coincidence? (1)

smooth wombat (796938) | more than 6 years ago | (#22245930)

they face fines of up to $200,000. . . .


Could this news item from Sweden [cbsnews.com] have anything to do with these possible fines?

Re:Coincidence? (1)

TheGratefulNet (143330) | more than 6 years ago | (#22246050)

next time, use batteries in the device. and 'show' an AC plug so that people 'feel good' about pulling it.

oh rats. I just gave a really good secret away. rats.

Re:Coincidence? (2, Interesting)

esocid (946821) | more than 6 years ago | (#22246076)

So let me get this straight. If you copy a CD the MAFIAA wants $1.5mil but if you, in the eyes of their courts, are a major distributor you only get a $200,000 fine. I seriously doubt that they will be able to prove any sort of copyright infringement.

The Swedish prosecutor listed dozens of works that had been downloaded through The Pirate Bay site, including The Beatles' Let It Be, Robbie Williams' Intensive Care and the movie Harry Potter & The Goblet of Fire.

I'm sorry you fail prosecutor. Understand the protocol before you throw out allegations like that.

Re:Coincidence? (1)

Pofy (471469) | more than 6 years ago | (#22246310)

>So let me get this straight. If you copy a CD the MAFIAA wants $1.5mil but
>if you, in the eyes of their courts, are a major distributor you only get
>a $200,000 fine. I seriously doubt that they will be able to prove any sort
>of copyright infringement.

Apart from this being two different countries, it is worth noticing that the $200,000 mentioned is NOT really a fine. The only fines one can get in a criminal case are based on ones income and there is a maximum of about $25,000. For more severe crimes one can get prision instead (but you can't get both).

The $200,000 are the sum the prosecutor claims they gained on their activity. In addition to the actual fine/prison/other one get, one can also have to pay a sum equal to the gain.

Re:Coincidence? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22246480)

Damn straight, they don't let things like logic and sound reasoning get in the way of things. That little girl just burned a copy of *insert disney pop band album*...quick, grab her by the feet and shake her upside down until we get $1.5 mill.

Sarcasm aside, unfortunately, stories like this and the $1.5 mill per burned disc will never make it to the mass media to really get people pissed off and the ball rolling, since, well, the mass media is owned by the corporations that are suing Joe Sixpacks like you and me. This is what happens when you have a few large conglomerates controlling information flow.

Heave to and prepare to be boarded! (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22245952)

Arrrrrr!

Summary correction. (5, Insightful)

EasyTarget (43516) | more than 6 years ago | (#22245954)

Nothing has been downloaded through the Pirate bay's site.

Plenty has been downloaded because of it.

All the legal arguments are going to hinge around this vital distinction, so it would help if the submitter could have been bothered to get it right.

Re:Summary correction. (5, Informative)

EasyTarget (43516) | more than 6 years ago | (#22245992)

..or if I could have been bothered to realise the submitter was just quoting the prosecutor (who is doubtless very aware of this distinction, and will seek to blur it at every possibel oppertunity..)

Re:Summary correction. (4, Insightful)

tomhudson (43916) | more than 6 years ago | (#22246140)

It wasn't the submitter:

The Swedish prosecutor listed dozens of works that had been downloaded through The Pirate Bay site

Of course, he could have also listed dozens of works that have been downloaded through Microsoft Windows, through the phone company, through Dell, etc ... since they didn't host the files either.

Re:Summary correction. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22246572)

Windows and Dell machines have significant non-infringing uses.

Re:Summary correction. (1)

xtal (49134) | more than 6 years ago | (#22246198)

By this arguement, you could extend it to say Slashdot is liable for promoting bittorrent PTP through news and discussion.

I hope this lawsuit gets tossed in the rubbish bin where it belongs.

Re:Summary correction. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22246388)

That's partially true, they aren't just hosting links though, they are hosting the actual torrents which contain the instructions for downloading the actual content.


That's not really the spirit of those laws though, it's just a very specific technicality. Generally, you have to be a huge corporation or a nation state or dictator to get away with profiting from crimes, just about anywhere in the world. Eventually the free ride will end at pirate bay and it'll most likely end with those guys either going to prison, going in to exile or ending up dead; at least that's how it usually works. We're not talking about a non-trivial amount of money or content either, they just crossed over 10,000,000 users, what percentage are purely downloading legal content? That's a trick question, what percentage of the content is legal? 1% on a good day? maybe? I mean it part in jest but part in truth, these guys very literally could be risking their lives the longer it goes on.

Re:Summary correction. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22246532)

>vital distinction

That they have made an organized crime of being accessories to widespread infractions...
If their own statements or internal correspondence support this claim, the case is made.

Re:Summary correction. (1)

urcreepyneighbor (1171755) | more than 6 years ago | (#22246610)

Nothing has been downloaded through the Pirate bay's site.
They run the tracker? Yes? Then, yes, the crap has been download through their site/tracker.

I'm sure a lawyer can chime in here, but it's my understanding that if I allow illegal acts to be performed on my property... then I can be held responsible for it.

Example: if I let someone sell coke in my living room, I can be charged. Not sure with what, but the "I didn't know!" excuse won't hold up - especially if there are bags and bags of the crap out in the open for anyone to see.

To take the example further: if I tell someone where they can buy coke - specifically tell them from whom and where, I'm sure I could get charged, too.

Pissing, bitching and moaning on /., while fun and a good exercise in futility, won't change the fact that TPB boys are screwed.

Anyone want to start a wig fund for them?

Our laws are not the world's laws. (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22245956)

So if we can prosecute swedish people for crimes that aren't crimes in their country can we also give speeding tickets to drivers on the autobahn that drive over 55 mph?

Re:Our laws are not the world's laws. (1)

Salgak1 (20136) | more than 6 years ago | (#22246144)

At this rate, everyone who voted for Bush will be brought up on trial in Europe for "enabling crimes against humanity". . . Go-go MPAA-RIAA-crime-family lawyers, go!! What's next, getting prosecuted for whisting the tune to a hit song without paying royalties ?

Re:Our laws are not the world's laws. (5, Informative)

pnewhook (788591) | more than 6 years ago | (#22246368)

So if we can prosecute swedish people for crimes that aren't crimes in their country can we also give speeding tickets to drivers on the autobahn that drive over 55 mph?

Apparently the government thinks so. The US government recently had a Canadian arrested on Canadian soil for selling marijuana seeds on the internet (something that's not illegal in Canada). At no time did this person set foot on American soil, nor did he ever break Canadian law. Everything he did was above board right down to declaring exactly what he did on his Canadian tax return and paying taxes on the income. All profits were even donated to charity.

Yet the US government felt that they had the right to arrest him. More info here: http://canadianpress.google.com/article/ALeqM5h9Y7CVPeypqV77yWBmI45x_mP9SA [google.com] .

Re:Our laws are not the world's laws. (2, Informative)

putaro (235078) | more than 6 years ago | (#22246442)

The prosecution is happening in Sweden under Swedish law. No need to add gratuitous America bashing to the discussion.

Re:Our laws are not the world's laws. (2, Informative)

asdfgl (891883) | more than 6 years ago | (#22246462)

The people prosecuted are prosecuted by swedish laws in a swedish court. Oh, they are swedish citizens as well... You can't prosecute crimes not commited in Sweden in swedish courts. That is mostly a good thing.

Link to PDF-file with the charges (2, Informative)

pistolhot (978046) | more than 6 years ago | (#22245962)

Re:Link to PDF-file with the charges (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22246372)

where can I get the torrent for this?

At least they didn't copy a CD! (5, Funny)

noidentity (188756) | more than 6 years ago | (#22245972)

instead, they face fines of up to $200,000 and the confiscation of all their hardware.

Good thing they didn't copy a CD, otherwise they'd be paying $1.5 million [slashdot.org] !

not downloaded from the Pirate Bay (4, Insightful)

russ1337 (938915) | more than 6 years ago | (#22245986)

'The Swedish prosecutor listed dozens of works that had been downloaded through The Pirate Bay site, including The Beatles' Let It Be, Robbie Williams' Intensive Care and the movie Harry Potter & The Goblet of Fire. Plaintiffs in the case include Warner, MGM, Columbia Pictures, 20th Century Fox Films, Sony BMG, Universal and EMI.'"


It's been said 1000 times: These things were not downloaded FROM the Pirate Bay - they just provide the reference as to where they could be downloaded from. Do you think that by listing The Beatles and Robbie Williams I'm supposed to have sympathy? By listing Harry Potter are they 'thinking of the children?' - is the list of big media supposed to be scary? TPB are very careful not to break Swedish law. They don't care what the laws of other countries are - (I'm looking at you USA) as they live in SWEDEN they are only concerned with Swedish law.

I hope they come out squeaky clean - as they should as they have not broken their countries law.

Re:not downloaded from the Pirate Bay (0, Offtopic)

russ1337 (938915) | more than 6 years ago | (#22246018)

BAH!!!

countries - country's

what evs

Re:not downloaded from the Pirate Bay (2, Insightful)

nomadic (141991) | more than 6 years ago | (#22246084)

It's been said 1000 times: These things were not downloaded FROM the Pirate Bay - they just provide the reference as to where they could be downloaded from

IAAL, but not a Swedish (or European) one, and I know your argument wouldn't necessarily be convincing in a US court. It's a technicality, and a judge (or jury) would probably be more interested in TPB's intent and whether TPB's actions helped result in the copyright violation.

From the Model Penal Code:

(a) A person, acting with the mental state required for commission of an offense, who solicits, requests, commands, importunes or intentionally aids another person to engage in conduct which constitutes an offense shall be criminally liable for such conduct and may be prosecuted and punished as if he were the principal offender.

Re:not downloaded from the Pirate Bay (1)

Salgak1 (20136) | more than 6 years ago | (#22246182)

Gee, then compliance to the letter of the law, when it inconveniences the MPAA-RIAA Crime Family is now a crime ?

Re:not downloaded from the Pirate Bay (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22246188)

Sweden is probably *not* a common law country. Would that make a difference?

Re:not downloaded from the Pirate Bay (3, Informative)

russ1337 (938915) | more than 6 years ago | (#22246290)

Its not good sighting the US penal code. This is from the /a>Swedish penal code [sweden.gov.se] :

A person who, with the intention of committing or promoting a crime, presents or receives money or anything else as pre-payment or payment for the crime or who procures, constructs, gives, receives, keeps, conveys or engages in any other similar activity with poison, explosive, weapon, picklock, falsification tool or other such means, shall, in cases where specific provisions exist for the purpose, be sentenced for preparation of crime unless he is guilty of a completed crime or attempt. In specially designated cases a sentence shall also be imposed for conspiracy. By conspiracy is meant that someone decides on the act in collusion with another as well as that someone undertakes or offers to execute it or seeks to incite another to do so.
I expect that is what the prosecution will be focused on.

Re:not downloaded from the Pirate Bay (5, Interesting)

kevinbr (689680) | more than 6 years ago | (#22246540)

If I go to Pirate Bay, I always get there via Google who have direct indexed links of torrent pages, and Google get ad revenue. Either both google and Pirate bay are guilty or neither.

Re:not downloaded from the Pirate Bay (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22246544)

Years ago the maintainers of the Finnish torrent site "Finnreactor" were brought down because they accepted donations to keep the servers running. The prosecutor was able to use this fact to convince the court that the site's purpose was to generate income by promoting illegal activities which in turn was illegal under a law very similar to the one quoted above.

Indict Google... (5, Interesting)

fredklein (532096) | more than 6 years ago | (#22245994)

Or let them go.

Just have their lawyers show up in court with a laptop (with wireless connection and the appropriate software installed) and go to Google. Search for "Harry Potter Goblet Fire Torrent" and click a link. Viola- bittorrent starts up. Therefore, Google can be used to search for torrents, therefore they should be charged, too. If they are not charged, then it demonstrates selective prosecution. The same goes for ANY search engine.

Re:Indict Google... (1)

russ1337 (938915) | more than 6 years ago | (#22246118)

Just have their lawyers show up in court with a laptop (with wireless connection and the appropriate software installed) and go to Google. Search for "Harry Potter Goblet Fire Torrent" and click a link. Viola- bittorrent starts up. Therefore, Google can be used to search for torrents, therefore they should be charged, too. If they are not charged, then it demonstrates selective prosecution. The same goes for ANY search engine.
Or better yet, ask to see the prosecution's laptop. Then do a search using it. Show that the prosecution are guilty of the same thing they're accusing TPB of and have them taken into custody (preferably with the most dangerous offenders.)

Re:Indict Google... (2, Insightful)

91degrees (207121) | more than 6 years ago | (#22246278)

Do you consider the point of Google to be indexing illegal torrents? Or do you consider the point of The Pirate Bay to be something other than facilitating piracy?

Re:Indict Google... (1)

houghi (78078) | more than 6 years ago | (#22246292)

Don't be a wuss an us a link [google.be]

The fun part is that now Slashdot itself can be sued. You could link to tinyurl.com and sue them as well.

Seriously, what if I posted a link to an illegal torrentfile here. Would Slashdot be responsible for it? Is TPB actively doing something, or passively letting others add the links?

Re:Indict Google... (1)

apathy maybe (922212) | more than 6 years ago | (#22246438)

You know, there are now four results. Two of them from this very website (I believe the GP).

Google says that they were added "9 minutes" and "35 minutes" ago.

As for the other two, why would anyone actually want to download Harry Sticking Potter books anyway? They aren't worth the electronic bits they are printed on.

Learn 2 Google plz (1)

Dobeln (853794) | more than 6 years ago | (#22246622)

He should learn to Google, as he put quotes around the search ("Harry Potter Goblet Fire Torrent"), meaning Google searches for the exact phrase "Harry Potter Goblet Fire Torrent". Which, needless to say, isn't very common on teh interwebs. Removing the quotes yields some 118 000 hits. Pretty neat.

Re:Indict Google... (1)

jollyreaper (513215) | more than 6 years ago | (#22246432)

Just have their lawyers show up in court with a laptop (with wireless connection and the appropriate software installed) and go to Google. Search for "Harry Potter Goblet Fire Torrent" and click a link. Viola- bittorrent starts up. Therefore, Google can be used to search for torrents, therefore they should be charged, too. If they are not charged, then it demonstrates selective prosecution. The same goes for ANY search engine.
Ha ha! You fool! You fell victim to one of the classic blunders! The most famous is never get involved in a land war in Asia, but only slightly less well-known is this: never apply logic in a debate on IP infringement and copyright law!

Marijuana Vending Machines OPEN in California! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22246030)

Take your pick from Google News 300+ news articles about the marijuana vending machine in the USA:
http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&ned=us&ie=ISO-8859-1&ncl=1126931861 [google.com]

When will Slashdot pick up on this news, does one of the editors have to test it themselves?

Smoke em if you got em!

Oh, okay, some urls instead of a simple google news link:
http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&ned=us&ie=ISO-8859-1&ncl=1126931861 [google.com]
http://blogs.usatoday.com/ondeadline/2008/01/hot-button-medi.html?loc=interstitialskip [usatoday.com]
http://www.dailynews.com/news/ci_8104481 [dailynews.com]
http://wkrg.com/news/article/marijuana_vending_machines/9588/ [wkrg.com]

I know, this is OFFTOPIC isn't it? It wouldn't be if it was about RIAA, asteroids, robots, Microsoft, or Pirates smoking weed from vending machines. So this post is really this article... ON WEED!

arrrrrrrgh! (1)

sbate (916441) | more than 6 years ago | (#22246040)

I need a drink

Re:arrrrrrrgh! (1)

legoman666 (1098377) | more than 6 years ago | (#22246204)

but why is the rum gone?

Dozens?! (1)

Anita Coney (648748) | more than 6 years ago | (#22246072)

Gee, I was under the impression that the Pirate Bay was just a tad more popular than that. With that nominal amount of infringement I'm left wondering what the big deal is.

They look pretty hearty to me (4, Informative)

hahiss (696716) | more than 6 years ago | (#22246074)

This post on their blog seems to suggest that they are unbowed and that they will continue:

http://thepiratebay.org/blog/100 [thepiratebay.org]

Of course, it could be bluffing--but given their general reaction to legal threats [thepiratebay.org] and their reaction to the last raid [thepiratebay.org] , I'm guessing not.

Re:They look pretty hearty to me (1)

Ahruman (806510) | more than 6 years ago | (#22246352)

"The last raid" is what lead to this indictment.

Legal theory (1)

91degrees (207121) | more than 6 years ago | (#22246102)

The Pirate bay insisted for years that what they were doing was legal under Swedish law.

A per usual, this was a legal opinion based on an extremely naive understanding of how the law actually works. It seems that some people disagree with this opinion. "Some people" may even be right.

Seriusly, guys. If you're going to put your faith in a legal argument, make sure that the legal argument actually has some basis in established law.

Re:Legal theory (1)

unity100 (970058) | more than 6 years ago | (#22246336)

what you are forgetting is that the courts in almost every country take another section of some other law seemingly irrelevant to the subject at hand and use it to sentence defendants, if so is desired.

I find it incredibly amusing... (5, Interesting)

s_p_oneil (795792) | more than 6 years ago | (#22246138)

...that the damages being sought are less than the RIAA demanded from that woman who downloaded a few songs. I mean, $200K apiece for 4 people? I'll bet if they asked people to make Paypal donations to help them pay their legal fees and/or fines (while keeping the site up), they'd get millions pretty quickly. A lot of people would pay to keep a service like that up.

Re:I find it incredibly amusing... (1)

RattFink (93631) | more than 6 years ago | (#22246284)

The $200k is a court fine not civil damages.

Re:I find it incredibly amusing... (1)

Pofy (471469) | more than 6 years ago | (#22246428)

>...that the damages being sought are less than the RIAA demanded from that woman who downloaded a few songs.

This is a criminal case. It doesn't include any damages payable to the plaintiff. The $200,000 mentioned is not really a fine but rather the ammount of money the prosecutor claim is their gain on the activity which they would then have to pay in addition to any actual fine or prison sentence they might get.

Re:I find it incredibly amusing... (1)

Krofinzki (948985) | more than 6 years ago | (#22246444)

It's actually $200K split between them, so $50K apiece :)

Re:I find it incredibly amusing... (1)

s_p_oneil (795792) | more than 6 years ago | (#22246488)

That makes it even funnier. I apologize for not taking the time to RTFA, but I'm at work. ;-) And to everyone else who applied to me, I understand that they're not civil damages. It doesn't make it less amusing.

Re:I find it incredibly amusing... (1)

sukotto (122876) | more than 6 years ago | (#22246514)

...that the damages being sought are less than the RIAA demanded from that woman who downloaded a few songs. I mean, $200K apiece for 4 people?
I guess it really true that everything is better in Sweden :-)

Legit uses for The Pirate Bay? (1)

MobyDisk (75490) | more than 6 years ago | (#22246160)

Is there anything legit on The Pirate Bay? Yeah, I know they don't choose the content to go on it, but I'm just curious.

Yes (1)

BlueParrot (965239) | more than 6 years ago | (#22246302)

http://thepiratebay.org/tor/3697881/ubuntu-7.04-server-i386.iso [thepiratebay.org]

I'm sure there are more examples.

Re:Yes (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22246450)

Yeah! Now i dont need to pay 435 USD for that Ubuntu Unlimited Premium Gold Saphire PLatinum Edition

Re:Yes (1)

satoshi1 (794000) | more than 6 years ago | (#22246496)

You never did have to, but if you did then the link that the grandparent posted would be illegal instead of being merely legal.

Re:Legit uses for The Pirate Bay? (1)

tecmec (870283) | more than 6 years ago | (#22246306)

Yeah, there are. One example that comes to mind is game patches. On a few occasions I have torrented patches that weren't offered as a torrent from the software vendor. Sure, there are about 50 gameing sites that offer the download....but at a ridiculously slow speed.

Whither pornography? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22246174)

I'll admit, albeit behind the safety of anonymity, that I use The Pirate Bay mostly for pornographic torrents.


Would someone be kind enough to give some free, "public" sites (like The Pirate Bay) that specialize in such content? Help me make a list, just in case the Swedish authorities confiscate their servers and pull the site down.

Re:Whither pornography? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22246404)

how can you not know about http://www.empornium.us/ [empornium.us] ???

Re:Whither pornography? (1)

Vectronic (1221470) | more than 6 years ago | (#22246530)

No

Ho ho ho, this is BAD (4, Insightful)

BlueParrot (965239) | more than 6 years ago | (#22246208)

IANAL but as far as I know the police in Sweden is not actually allowed to search your property unless the crime you're accused for is serious enough that it could result in a prison sentence... So what they are basically saying is the police broke the law?

Re:Ho ho ho, this is BAD (2, Insightful)

mmcuh (1088773) | more than 6 years ago | (#22246350)

It was the prosecutor who ordered the raid in 2006, on the grounds that The Pirate Bay was committing copyright infringement, though he knew full well that he would never be able to charge them with anything more serious than conspiracy to or accessory to copyright infringement - he even said so himself a few months before the raid. This was reported to the Swedish watchdog authorities, who dropped the case after asking the police and the prosecutor "You didn't do anything wrong, did you?" and getting the response "No, of course not" (in a few more words).

Re:Ho ho ho, this is BAD (1)

Ahruman (806510) | more than 6 years ago | (#22246392)

A number of things [brokep.com] about the raid are legally questionable. However, there's no requirement in Swedish law that evidence be obtained legally. Evidence is accepted at the judge's discretion.

What they said ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22246216)

The profiteers behind The Entertainment Industry have no interest in free speech, and they are not running their industries because they love music and films. They are totally mercenary and are driven by the desire for personal wealth.

This will have consequences for all search engines (4, Insightful)

zerofoo (262795) | more than 6 years ago | (#22246228)

I've found pirated material via Google, Yahoo, Teoma, Altavista, and others. If courts world-wide decide that search engines that merely index and catalog illegal or copyrighted material can be held liable for the trade of illegal or copyrighted material, then that will be a HUGE problem for every company that has search as its core business.

What about hiring a prostitute from an escort/dating service listed in the phonebook? Can the publishers of the phonebook be charged as accomplices to the crime?

This case will have profound consequences for anyone in the search or directory business.

-ted

Re:This will have consequences for all search engi (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22246316)

What about hiring a prostitute from an escort/dating service listed in the phonebook? Can the publishers of the phonebook be charged as accomplices to the crime?

I'm not sure about in Sweeden, but in Orlando, Florida, a weekly newspaper's ad director was recently arrested for aiding prostitution [orlandosentinel.com] becausae the police claim that he knew the escort service ads that he allowed to be placed on the back page of the paper came from known prostitues.

So yes, you can be arrested for that. Whether it's actually a crime or whether the police can prove that you are aware of the circumstances remains to be seen...

Accessories (1)

cunamara (937584) | more than 6 years ago | (#22246294)

Downloading copyrighted material is theft under the law. Helping people to do this is being an accessory to a crime. As much as we like to bitch about how draconian current copyright laws are, they are still the laws. We should not be astonished when laws are enforced. Nobody has the legal right to download "Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire" without paying the copyright holders for it. But that's just what PirateBay and others help people to do.

Violating the laws to try to get them change- as some people promote- is a stupid strategy. All it does is harden the positions of copyright holders, lawmakers and courts against such actions. People like PirateBay are not freedom fighters.

Copyright law- particularly in the US- has been stretched out of all reasonable proportion with significant cost to the public wellbeing. Part of this is due to the prevailing right-wing belief that there are no public goods, only private goods, and a belief in the values of private opulence and public squalor as J Kenneth Galbraith put it. If we want to overcome this and get the laws changed to something reasonable, we're not going to do it by breaking the laws. We have to do what the copyright holders did: make our case in a clear and convincing fashion to the people who write the laws.

Re:Accessories (1)

mmcuh (1088773) | more than 6 years ago | (#22246564)

Downloading copyrighted material without the copyright owner's permission is copyright infringement under the law. Though it was legal in Sweden until some 30 months ago. It is in no way theft, which is regulated by a completely different law.

Helping people distribute digital data may be construed as accessory to crime, depending on the intent and the methods. I doubt that Microsoft are going to get charged with accessory to copyright infringement, though most people illegally distributing and downloading copyrighted material on the internet probably use Windows. I doubt that the Azureus or KTorrent authors are going to get charged with the same thing (even though I imagine the copyright industry lobbyists would love it). You can use Windows to distribute free and non-free data. You can use Azureus and KTorrent to distribute free and non-free data. You can use The Pirate Bay to distribute free and non-free data.

The Pirate Bay themselves claim that they are not breaking any laws. The prosecutor who is handling the case has claimed the same thing - a few months before the raid in 2006 he wrote a report where he said that running a BitTorrent tracker was not illegal under current Swedish law. It would be silly for everyone to voluntarily stay far away from any action that could be interpreted by someone somewhere as being just a little illegal.

Re:Accessories (1)

Ahruman (806510) | more than 6 years ago | (#22246582)

Downloading copyrighted material is theft under the law.
No. Downloading copyrighted material without permission is copyright infringement under the law (for various values of "the" law, of course). They are (in Swedish law, as well as US law, and most if not all others) completely different and unrelated offences regulated by different laws, which are motivated by different concerns.

Helping people to do this is being an accessory to a crime.
This has not yet been established by a court (in Sweden). Or rather, it has not been established that this constitutes "helping" in a relevant sense.

Nobody has the legal right to download "Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire" without paying the copyright holders for it.
Wrong. It is entirely possible for a copyright holder to grant a license of a work without receiving payment. There may also be contexts in which a license is not required. For instance, see Law 1960:729 [notisum.se] (amended), 16 , paragraph 1, point 1. Wait, you're not familiar with Swedish copyright law? So why are you making categorical assertions about it?

Letter and Spirit. (1)

headkase (533448) | more than 6 years ago | (#22246296)

Bit's should be free in a perfect world but in the real world it takes effort to organize those bits and economics is a way to spread the effort around fairly. So, it's just a fact that when any torrent/warez site says they don't host the files they only link to them or metadata about them (torrents) that they are only obeying the letter of the law. The spirit of the law is that despite the occasional legal use for these sites the vast majority is based around infringement. As I see it, the distribution aspects of media are completely solved: bittorrent is king. What is underdeveloped is a compensation system and it is that way because it requires the cooperation of the industry and banks. If Limewire had a little button next to an mp3 that I could click on and have 30 cents securely debited out of my account magically reaching the artist then I think the outcry would be lessened. The current payment systems for the 'net like credit-cards or money-orders are just too unwieldy and are not suitable for small and frequent transactions. Solve that bit and I know at least in my case I would pay. So, we have a universal distribution system we just need a universal compensation system.

How else with the **AA make money... (5, Insightful)

dada21 (163177) | more than 6 years ago | (#22246354)

...but by lawsuits?

Honestly, I think The Pirate Bay is the best thing to happen. Because of it, we've gotten rid of cable TV. My wife and I will download a TV show or a movie before we buy it, watch a few episodes or minutes, and then go and buy the legit copy. The Pirate Bay is today's equivalent to reruns or syndication for television shows, or Blockbuster or NetFlix for the movie industry. The monopolists are just mad because they lose control over which productions to push and which to let fall by the wayside. Even better, torrent search sites also replace Nielsen for rating what is popular. I can find the latest popular movies just by sorting by seeds, and because of this I have purchased about 40 movies that I would NEVER have even heard of. Heck, the wife and I actually bought the Bourne trilogy because of The Pirate Bay -- the TV commercials and trailers were so bad that we would never have even thought of it.

Am I a pirate? In some ways, yes, but we own tens of thousands of dollars worth of music, TV DVDs, and movies, and I attribute it solely to being able to taste before I buy. I think in the past year we've had MAYBE ten torrents that I forgot to erase when I realized I didn't like what I saw.

Remember who these large production companies are: they're multi-tiered organizations where the right hand doesn't talk to the left hand. These companies do many things:

1. Raise money and invest in productions (i.e., producing)
2. Market finished productions (i.e., advertising)
3. Protect the industry insiders (actors, directors, producers, and crew) from competition by locking the distribution medium (i.e., monopolizing)

Now, the future is getting rid of them. Want to raise money for a money or a TV pilot? Invest in making a trailer. Put it out there. Get people interested to fund your production, maybe even sell bonds (of course the SEC and IRS will prevent you from doing this versus a market economy where people understand the risks inherent to investing). Once you've raised enough, you go and shoot the flick. Give it away online at low res, or evne at high res, and sell value added products to raise the funds. If people love the production, they'll pay for it. We do. Many of our friends do. Most of my family does.

I laugh when people try to get great shows back on the air, like Serenity. Joss Whedon is one of the most vile monopolists ever. It's his fault directly for the death of Firefly. He could get online, start a money raising campaign, and go back to business. But he wants to pander to his union/monopolist buddies. He loves the residuals he receives on the backs of others. He's part of the industry, and that's why I'm glad Firefly failed, even though we love the show and watch the legal DVDs regularly. Screw Joss, screw Hollywood, and screw the industry twice over -- they're not ready for a truly market-based economy of art, where people subsidize the FUTURE production of more content by purchasing the previously produced content.

The Internet will destroy these monopolists/mercantilists quicker and quicker every day. Their only option to "save themselves" and their grotesque profits is to use the laws that THEY created, prompt the pawns that THEY elected, and force people to pay money that the people earned through labors they actively did. The people behind the Pirate Bay spend an amazing amount of time keeping it running. The users may submit content, but the servers, Internet connections, software code and overall support need labor to keep it running. TPB deserves every penny, and then some. Maybe TPB should produce a high budget movie or TV series.

Making Money (5, Insightful)

Fozzyuw (950608) | more than 6 years ago | (#22246358)

John Kennedy, chairman and chief executive of global music body, the International Federation of the Phonographic Industries, said: "The operators of The Pirate Bay have always been interested in making money, not music.

Does anyone read that and NOT think: "What's the difference from Record labels?" =P

crap (3, Interesting)

WormholeFiend (674934) | more than 6 years ago | (#22246390)

I'm not done downloading that 17 gb of private MySpace photos yet!!!

I hope they become legend. (1)

Thanshin (1188877) | more than 6 years ago | (#22246400)

- Space age (1957-1971)
  - Information age (1971-tpb victory)
  - Free data flow age. (tpb victory - ...)

Explain it to me like a 4-year-old (1)

Eggplant62 (120514) | more than 6 years ago | (#22246402)

How is locking our culture, our music, our films behind lock and key to be performed only on a pay-per-view basis going to help anyone but RIAA/MPAA? For centuries, people have been sharing cultural performances without much upset from the artists and producers. Now comes the digital age, these companies missed the boat by about 10 years in trying to understand the technology and deliver their product in the easiest, most obvious way that people want to use it, so people do what they have done for years, and that suddenly means it's time to sue everyone and his brother for copyright violations?

Shoot the other foot next.

Re:Explain it to me like a 4-year-old (1)

Shados (741919) | more than 6 years ago | (#22246584)

Because its not just these things. Indy music is "easy" to produce (assuming you have the talent...I mean, you don't need too much ressources, unless you want advertising). Films could be easier, could be worse. These "locks" however, don't prevent free music and movies from happening. Since commercial music, and many, many commercial movies totally SUCK, it would be no big loss.

Now however... take videogames. How many GOOD open (from launch, not 15 years later) games have you seen? Any public domain Final Fantasy-level games in the making? GnuRPG or something? No. Too much stress, time and effort required for people to do this as a hobby. There's the odd RTS or FPS popping up every now and then, but they're no Half Life 2.

Now take software development. How freakishly long did it take to have free software that had decent UI? Oh, we have 127943091274091470921 command line tools and servers: those are fun to make. But how long did it take before those tools got decent usuability? Polishing these softwares to make em usuable requires a lot more than basement-level hacking skills, and to most, it sucks. It gets done so fast in the commercial world because people are getting paychecks.

Personaly, I'm a gamer, and I'm sick of MMOs (which would still be possible without all the copyright mess), and I'm not totally willing to see all these commercial-only beauties go the way of the dodo. Maybe someday -all- of the sides of intellectual properties will be like music (that is: the indy/free stuff is GOOD), but until then, lets keep copyright around a little while longer.

Only $200K in fines? Ha! (1)

Jtheletter (686279) | more than 6 years ago | (#22246424)

Doesn't TPB rake in something like $500K per month in advertising revenues? It might even be more than that but last I knew that number was unbelievably high. Losing the HW is probably the more expensive problem if they are found guilty, but even so, I'm sure they've got everything backed up in a half dozen other countries by now.

Time for some copyright reform (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22246520)

'The Swedish prosecutor listed dozens of works that had been downloaded through The Pirate Bay site, including The Beatles' Let It Be,

Nice to see Swedish taxpayer money being used to defend the rights of pedophiles to live off the works of others. If there was ever a case for copyright reform, the Beatles' royalties are it.

Swedish Pride? (1)

exabrial (818005) | more than 6 years ago | (#22246568)

I was under the impression that the Swedes are very independent and would not be pushed around by international influences... I feel for the people but I hope they have courage enough to stand up against the money machine attacking their liberty/sovereignty and send these fools packing!

File type mismatch (1)

bubbaprog (783125) | more than 6 years ago | (#22246576)

Either someone is very confused or Sweden has a strange legal system. If they've been indicted, then they're being brought up on criminal charges. There are no "plaintiffs" in a criminal case.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

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>