http://torrentfreak.com/the-pirate-bay-trial-the-verdict-090417/

Just minutes ago the verdict in the case of The Pirate Bay Four was announced. All four defendants were accused of ‘assisting in making copyright content available’. Peter Sunde: Guilty. Fredrik Neij: Guilty. Gottfrid Svartholm: Guilty. Carl Lundström: Guilty. All receive 1 year in jail and fines for the four total $3,620,000.

In what is probably one of the most watched court cases for all juarez monkeys around the world the verdict is in. I thought Swedish's fairly liberal copyright laws would have seen this go down as a not guilty. I wonder if there was a bit of MPAA/RIAA/WANKERS/etc heavy pressure on the outcome.

The 1 year jail wouldn't be too bad, but that much money?

Wtf, I doubt they made that much profit.

Interesting case result.

Wtf, I doubt they made that much profit.

It's not a matter of taking any profit they made, its a matter of compensating the plaintiffs for any loss incurred by their actions.

will this verdict actually change anything? or will it just mean that some other torrent site is next on the chopping block.

it means you nerds need to come up with something newer than torrents to f*** their s*** up, like something where the torrent themselves give you the listing of torrents.. I dunno, you figure it out...

The bit I don't get in all of this is that juarez was freely available on newsgroups decades ago, long before torrents were a thought yet nobody seems to be chasing down AstraWeb or other providers.

Yeah stop using piratebay.org

bet iinet will be found guilty in their court case now.

If you have to pay that much money and dont have it what happens ???

I think you declare bankruptcy and you start getting taxed a huge amount and only have enough to barely live by.

Newsgroups don't have a central single server that advertises the files offered in each group. They actually had better peer2peer than some systems today. Piratebay was focused cause they publicly offered files and knowingly hosted them.

Newsgroups were very difficult to moderate as people could just re-upload to a new node and it would again be in the group, then each server would need to remove those files from its feed/archive to stop it from spreading. Piratebay only needed to delete the .torrent file and it would stop from spreading (even though most torrent clients now support DHS).

I'm surpised by the jail time, not so much at the fine. They wouldn't have made much money from the site, the traffic it would have generated would be expensive to maintain.

screw that, fake your own death and take on a stolen identity!

I'd recommend this little beauty.

Juarez for everyone!

f*** off phooks

bet iinet will be found guilty in their court case now.

Different set of complaints. The Pirate Bay case should have no influence.

Edit: 10-1 isohunt is next

Kevin Rudd's fault. The libs would have never let this happen

Hahaha phooks.

They need to sue the power companies who provided power to the pirate bay knowingly assisting in their infringement.

yeah I dunno.
Having things like "Download music, movies, games, software and much more." on the front page kinda make their intentions irrefutable. IMO torrent sites should be less blatant and in your face about their primary purpose.

Piratebay was focused cause they publicly offered files and knowingly hosted them.

yeh but they only hosted pointer files..

random thought- if you encode a dvd into an avi. then print out the raw txt (All 50 million pages), bind it into a book and try and sell it - would the movie company sue you? Surely the work you're selling is so far removed from the original that they would have no case..

be cool if someone invented some kind of encryption type thing where it would encode files all messed up like, but with one 'missing piece' so it was completly different to the original file, and that by itself there was no way to recreate the original.

the missing piece would always be the same (somehow the program does this) amongst encrypted files and distrusted separately for free. then you could download these random files all you want, plug in the key and away you go.

hmm im pretty tired did that even make any sense?

yeh but they only hosted pointer files..

random thought- if you encode a dvd into an avi. then print out the raw txt (All 50 million pages), bind it into a book and try and sell it - would the movie company sue you? Surely the work you're selling is so far removed from the original that they would have no case..

be cool if someone invented some kind of encryption type thing where it would encode files all messed up like, but with one 'missing piece' so it was completly different to the original file, and that by itself there was no way to recreate the original.

the missing piece would always be the same (somehow the program does this) amongst encrypted files and distrusted separately for free. then you could download these random files all you want, plug in the key and away you go.

hmm im pretty tired did that even make any sense?

so you want fries with that?

^ basically what winzip/winrar does
it obsfucates it and breaks it down, putting in a salt (password) makes it "impossible" to crack

but cmon, everyone has winzip .. so you'd have to call it pizwin and then there would be a court case saying "if the file can be construed as having once been a movie" rah rah rah, you go to gaol anyway

movie companies have more money than anyone who pirates their movies, that pretty much means they will always win - over a long enough time line

they hosted more than torrent files, they also have tracker servers.

http://users.bigpond.net.au/Skitza/idnstc.jpg

<3 newsgroups.

haha @ stephen fry's latest twitters about it:

Yes, use of "torrents" deliberate. Poor old Pirates. As an industry insider & (c) holder I'm not supposed to support them, but I do.

PB not saints. But we've got to think about this rationally & sensibly. Shouting "thief" all the time is no help. I stole in cassette age

Oh lord I'm going to be in SUCH trouble with colleagues. Newsnight already on phone asking for int re PB judgment (can't do it) - cripes!

That's too bad...

Ah well, torrents are s*** anyway... But I still want them to remain popular, so they take the focus away from my beloved Usenet.

wow

I'm sitting here still working out what usenet is to be honest, a newsfeed? I dunno, somehow it's another way of file sharing.

I'm sitting here still working out what usenet is to be honest, a newsfeed? I dunno, somehow it's another way of file sharing.

plz google "the first rule about usenet"

is don't talk about usenet.

think fightclub

edit: beaten

shouldn't you be F5'ing your internet banking page infi

last edited by tequila at 00:36:44 18/Apr/09

Leave usenet to the pros.

The pirate bay was so blatant about what they were doing they were bound to get done for it.

i have hands that model! I cant handle your truth!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

supanova...mininova...mediumnova. ther will be always something/

fyi... Newzbin are about to go to court over a similar type of thing... for NZB's.

yeh but they only hosted pointer files..

random thought- if you encode a dvd into an avi. then print out the raw txt (All 50 million pages), bind it into a book and try and sell it - would the movie company sue you? Surely the work you're selling is so far removed from the original that they would have no case..

be cool if someone invented some kind of encryption type thing where it would encode files all messed up like, but with one 'missing piece' so it was completly different to the original file, and that by itself there was no way to recreate the original.

the missing piece would always be the same (somehow the program does this) amongst encrypted files and distrusted separately for free. then you could download these random files all you want, plug in the key and away you go.

hmm im pretty tired did that even make any sense?

Missing the point of the case - Its not specifically that they hosted torrents, its that they knowingly supported piracy... they had opportunity to stop the piracy (which their service facilitated) and they didn't do anything.

It is sort of similar in concept to the iiNet case... iinet were warned that users were downloading pirated tv/movies, but didn't do anything to stop it. Probably won't make a difference to the case though.

Its not specifically that they hosted torrents, its that they knowingly supported piracy... they had opportunity to stop the piracy (which their service facilitated) and they didn't do anything.

Actually the Piratebay did do things, stupid things. Such as replying with stupid emails that insulted and implied that they supported the piracy.

iiNet on the other hand has said that they did not pass on notices to customers because the customers have privacy rights and if the notice issuing companies wanted to get to the customers they would have to go through the correct channels, such as relevant authorities.

man that sucks, they are slowly winning :|

i dont know, they should really make it easier to watch stuff online, itunes isnt so bad but lags behind ,whats showing

wasn't there some big youtube deal recently to be able to stream full eps and movies?

They just had a fairly big protest in the main street of Göteborg an hour or so ago about "free speach" and how the swedish government is starting to be a pawn to the US.
Lotsa noise and lotsa kiddies
but yes.. this is BIG news here in Sweden.

Ha! That's stupid. The pirate bay isn't about free speech, it is about getting full version software without paying for it. So when they say "free speech" they are really meaning "free software".

So do they think it is their right to get software developed from hard work for free? Do they also believe they should not get paid for the work they do?

It would be a different story if the pirate bay only hosted public domain stuff.

Well thats just it they aren't hosting anything.

Its kinda like pirate bay was a guy sitting on a street corner, and you walked up and asked, where do i get "lost s5ep10" and he said, heres direction to a place where a bunch of guys have it and a sharing it, go ask them if they will give it to you.

Now imagine this guy is somehow answering thousand/millions of questions a day, would the police/courts shut this guy down, of course they would becuase he is facilitating copyright infringement, he doesnt actualy have anything, and doesnt make any money (not sure if pirate bay actualy made money or not, if they did they they definatly should go down) but he still facilitates the copyright infrigment.

They are trying to hide behind technicalities, and it didnt work. Im not saying I dont use torrents, and having pirate bay shut down will be a pain in the ass, but what they are doing is illegal.

The main reason i use torrents is for tv shows becuase australia sucks for tv show distribution, so its all the tv stations own fault and until they get better with tv distrubution ill continue to do it. If they had a decent online presence and i could watch hi-def, or even decent quality shows online, even with ad's then i would watch it, as long as they play the shows straight after the us, not 6 months/a year later.

Software like the Hiro client that channel nine are using are crap, i dont want to install software that autoloads and apparently scans my hdd and sends data off.

TV Shows need to be cheaper on itunes. $2 per episode for current stuff and $1 for old stuff is what it should be.

How much are they now on itunes? (I'm too lazy to check the price myself).

No actually its not like that its more like this

A person looking for something goes to a torrent site inputs something in the search box finds a torrent, the torrent then gets the parts required to complete the torrent making it a complete file. The guy just has a site that stores torrent files nothing actually illegal. Basically what you are seeing happen here is this. Some person muders another person another person is at the scene, and now they are in fact liable for the murders actions.

last edited by Corrupt at 18:05:41 23/Apr/09

its called being an accessory to murder...

be cool if someone invented some kind of encryption type thing where it would encode files all messed up like, but with one 'missing piece' so it was completly different to the original file, and that by itself there was no way to recreate the original.

As already mentioned, this is sort of like what programs do when you encrypt something. I imagine if you had enough raw computational power you could put enough of the info together to surmise the original file type, but isn't intentionally trying to crack somebody else's encryption itself a crime?

Some person muders another person another person is at the scene, and now they are in fact liable for the murders actions.

It's more like if I came up to you and asked where somebody was, and you told me and I killed them, and then you were charged with the murder. Even if you stood there yelling out "HEY! If you're looking for somebody so that you can kill them, I can tell you where they are!", you still wouldn't get convicted. Gun companies brag about the stopping force of their guns, and they don't get trialed for murders. IMO the statement of intent shouldn't matter, since at the end of the day the users chose to use the site for crimes.

Gun manufacturors get a nice loophole in that they supply guns not just for killing but for defense of life. There isn't the same application of logic for a torrent site. they host files, they create indexes and categories for the type of files, which implies they know whats being hosted.

Pirate groups used to be able to do what they did because law allowed people to evaluate any software for 24hours, and the pirate groups facilitated that which the removal of copy protection and distribution of the files. With that law now rescinded from Operation Buccaneer, pirate groups are now culpable from Intellectual Property infringement laws.

Using Freedom of Speech as a reason to pirate is just dumb. Anyone who defends people who do this saying "its for the people!", please go uppercut yourself and then go practice your Freedom from Oppression rights to euthanize yourself.

I can understand people not wanting to pay the extreme prices software has, but least be honest with yourself. You pirate cause you're a cheap arse.

A nice political example would be if a software company released their product online for free in protest of something. That's freedom of Speech in action, not the theft of their lively hood published on a website for people to trade.

It all comes down to the media companies (TV/Movie/Music) needing to rethink their entire business model and delivery system.

I download quite a few TV series, most aren't on TV here or are a season or two behind the US/UK. If a someone was to come and offer me a download service akin to pay-tv where I can download my shows each week and watch them when I want in whatever format I choose for a subscription fee of something like $40pm I would happily pay.

We need to see a service offering like Nokia's comes with music promotion, you can't tell me they wouldn't get a hell of a lot of sign ups for a years unlimited TV/movie downloads for a fee of $300-400. I'd be first in line for a service like that.

The guy just has a site that stores torrent files nothing actually illegal.

What does the torrent do? it links to copyrighted material, thats its only purpose, techy people like us just know exactly how it all works and try to somehow legitimise torrents becuase they arent they actual copyrighted material.

ok, the murder analogy, some guy asks another guy, hey I want to murder joe bob, you know where he is, first guy says, yeah sure here is his address. and no, the person cant murder the first person if he doesnt give him the answer.

looks like the defence lawyers are calling for a retrial because the judge holds close ties to pro-copyright organisations.

http://www.thelocal.se/19028/20090423/

last edited by ravn0s at 10:02:12 24/Apr/09

Yes, it is all over this morning news here.
So many swedish legal guys offering opinions and such and infact a lot are saying the desicion should stay.
Apparently they may go to the high court and see if this desicion will stick
I can see this trial going to trial to see if this trial needs to be tried.
sigh... more protests coming up i guess :|

These legal stoushes are just the growing pains of the new digital world.

Industry hasn't been able to react fast enough to the changes of the past 15 years - and you can't blame them really. We're talking about radical changes to business models of humongous companies and large supply chains, affecting the livelihoods of millions of people.

Its not a fight that big media can win though - their actions amount to a rearguard movement to buy time while they can adjust to the reality of the new environment.

Consider what we are talking about. A desirable commodity that once produced, can be replicated for free, and distributed widely for negligible cost. Basic economics says that value is underwritten by scarcity. Pirated media is now so readily available as to make it effectively without value.

The public is being asked to pay for digital media on an honor system. The public generally has very low standards of honor - the only time the honor system works is when charitable institutions are involved. I wonder how much the MS society loses in free chocolates?

The risk : reward ratio for pinching stuff online is just too low.

Moralistic arguments aside, the current business model for distribution of digital media just can't survive.

last edited by Hogfather at 16:38:40 24/Apr/09

What does the torrent do? it links to copyrighted material, thats its only purpose, techy people like us just know exactly how it all works and try to somehow legitimise torrents becuase they arent they actual copyrighted material.

The bit torrent protocol is just a method of transmitting data, that's it. A torrent doesn't HAVE to be linked to illegally-shared copyright material. Blizzard uses torrenting to distribute patches. You could use torrents to share photos with friends and family, or distribute work documents to different locations. This whole situation is just the P2P wars of the late 90's early 00's all over again: providers of a service are being blamed for how their users are chosing to use that service.

The bit torrent protocol is just a method of transmitting data, that's it. A torrent doesn't HAVE to be linked to illegally-shared copyright material. Blizzard uses torrenting to distribute patches. You could use torrents to share photos with friends and family, or distribute work documents to different locations. This whole situation is just the P2P wars of the late 90's early 00's all over again: providers of a service are being blamed for how their users are chosing to use that service.

You're focusing on the technicalities.. not the legalities. The Pirate bay charges have nothing to do with saying Torrents are pirated content, they state that torrents on TPB.org are links to content that's not licensed for distribution. TPB is not a provider without knowledge. They KNOW their userbase is uploading and trading pirated software yet put up the ineffectual banner saying "Nothing hosted here, Boss! I not break the law". Its like me putting a sniper rifle on a tripod and some random walking up, loading the weapon and shooting someone with it. I would be still be liable cause I provided the means to kill.

Torrents are fine; raging against the protocol is like being offended by TCP/IP.

After all, most data is transmitted via TCP/IP networks right? That makes the inventors the biggest offendors of all!

This has no bearing on the pirate bay disussion. These guys defied the law on a massive scale and got nailed. The law is the law and you ignore it at your own risk.

These guys flaunted what they were doing.

It all comes down to the media companies (TV/Movie/Music) needing to rethink their entire business model and delivery system.

I download quite a few TV series, most aren't on TV here or are a season or two behind the US/UK. If a someone was to come and offer me a download service akin to pay-tv where I can download my shows each week and watch them when I want in whatever format I choose for a subscription fee of something like $40pm I would happily pay.

We need to see a service offering like Nokia's comes with music promotion, you can't tell me they wouldn't get a hell of a lot of sign ups for a years unlimited TV/movie downloads for a fee of $300-400. I'd be first in line for a service like that.

Liar. You'd come up with a new lame excuse for not using the service, because everyone loves free stuff.

What is pissing us Swedes off most is the way the US companies have leaned on swedish authorities to get the thing in court to begin with.
Remember, we have a legitimate political party based on piracy.
and this crap about the biased judge... some very unhappy swedes.

Liar. You'd come up with a new lame excuse for not using the service, because everyone loves free stuff.

Downloading isn't free, and people don't like the background knowledge that what hey are doing is illegal. The slim but possible prospect of being prosecuted isn't negligible.

People with residential download quotas of greater than 20G or so a month are probably downloading illegal s***, especially where there are only a few people using the connection.

At the rate of a dollar (?) per GB, especially if providers teamed with major ISPs to provide quota free mirrors of legit content, there is definetly room to move.

People pay more than a dollar per show or movie for cable. Paying (uncapped) a few dollars to legitimately view a movie on demand, or a dollar for a TV show, would probably move masses of people away from torrents. The pain in the arse factor of acquiring a legit rented DVD to watch a movie compared to just downloading it is probably a bigger factor than 5 bucks IMO.

What is pissing us Swedes off most is the way the US companies have leaned on swedish authorities to get the thing in court to begin with.

I can understand they are pissed off for that. However the underlying reason why they leaned in the first place is because a couple of people were greatly facilitating the ability of many more to steal their stuff, while poking fun at the copyright holders.

Once again there is no sympathy because they were quite clearly stealing and moral reasoning says it shouldn't be so.

So most people that aren't Swedes look at this and think,'Suck s***, you got busted'.


Also a party based on Piracy.. that is kinda silly. Imagine the trade sanctions that could be placed on Sweden.

they were quite clearly stealing

Yes, in the same way Xerox creating photocopy technology is stealing.

There is one way they can stop me downloading torrents, and that is to put the show I want to watch on television. I'm not interested in watching it 3 weeks, or even 3 days, after the rest of the world either.



last edited by thermite at 09:54:21 25/Apr/09

Are you a dunce?

Photocopy technology is the tech, just like torrent tech.

We are not debating the tech. We all know torrent tech is useful, much like a photocopier.


However you own a shop and you had 50 photocopiers in said shop and you not only allowed, but encouraged people to do full photo copies of entire books. Then you call your shop, PHOTOCOPY ENTIRE BOOKS HERE I'm sure you would eventually get done.

The photocopy machines were not the problem, what they were used for was, as was the overall intention of the shop that supplied the use of the photocopiers.

The same applies for The Pirate Bay. The torrent tech was not the problem, the problem was the blatant facilitation of pirating that the maintainers of the Pirate Bay allowed and encouraged.

There is one way they can stop me downloading torrents, and that is to put the show I want to watch on television. I'm not interested in watching it 3 weeks, or even 3 days, after the rest of the world either.

What you do with your time is up to you, stealing or not. The Pirate Bay getting busted is another somewhat connected issue.


last edited by Tollaz0r! at 10:00:01 25/Apr/09

now tha judge allocated to judge wether the original judge's decision was biased has been removed... for bias! :P heh.

story