Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 23rd Apr 2009 12:26 UTC, submitted by zegenie
Legal The verdict in the Pirate Bay trial surprised many people, seeing as how many errors the entertainment industry's lawyers had made, and how little understanding they seemed to have of how BitTorrent works. The height of the sentence also surprised many; for aiding in sharing just 33 copyrighted items, the four founders were sentenced to one year in jail, and a massive fine of 3.6 million USD. Well, as it turns out, we now know why we were all relatively surprised: the judge in the case, Thomas Norstrom, is member of the same pro-copyright groups as many of the people representing the entertainment industry in the case.
Thread beginning with comment 360071
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Jason Bourne
Member since:
2007-06-02

If you handed a gun for someone to shoot, wouldn't you be helping the killer to accomplish his task? I don't think Piratebay guys are any that naive. They know.

However, piracy is a delicate subject. Absurd & high prices absolutely feed the piracy infinite loop. If we only had fair prices on music & films, we would not go the alternative way.

Reply Score: 3

Calipso Member since:
2007-03-13

The problem here is, who's to say what price is fair?

There will always be those people that would rather steal than pay no matter what the price is.

Reply Parent Score: 3

zegenie Member since:
2005-12-31

Well it's a good thing those people aren't involved in so-called "piracy" - how then, would we be able to get our hands on something to create the "pirated" copies from, if the original was stolen?

Reply Parent Score: 1

bousozoku Member since:
2006-01-23

If you handed a gun for someone to shoot, wouldn't you be helping the killer to accomplish his task? I don't think Piratebay guys are any that naive. They know.

However, piracy is a delicate subject. Absurd & high prices absolutely feed the piracy infinite loop. If we only had fair prices on music & films, we would not go the alternative way.


Absolutely. The judge should have recused himself from the case, knowing that he had a conflict of interest, but to support piracy still isn't right.

However, the high prices are only part of it. Some people just refuse to pay and no matter what you do, they're not going to change. Many people are simply entitled to whatever they see that they want.

Reply Parent Score: 6

Anonymous Penguin Member since:
2005-07-06



However, the high prices are only part of it. Some people just refuse to pay and no matter what you do, they're not going to change. Many people are simply entitled to whatever they see that they want.


I don't know how many times it has already been said, but I want to stress it once again: most "pirates" wouldn't buy what they download anyway.
Even Microsoft seems to undertand this simple fact. Rather a few pirates than a shrinking userbase.

Reply Parent Score: 6

dylansmrjones Member since:
2005-10-02

Absolutely. The judge should have recused himself from the case, knowing that he had a conflict of interest, but to support piracy still isn't right.


Well, right and wrong has nothing to do with law. Law has to do with legal vs. illegal.

Right vs. wrong has something to do with moral.

Personally I consider it wrong to have copyright, since my ownership of my production means are transferred to the copyright holder. And that is a violation of my private property. And that's wrong. Not to mention illegal (except if you are a multinational megacorporation, apparently).

Reply Parent Score: 3

WereCatf Member since:
2006-02-15

If you handed a gun for someone to shoot, wouldn't you be helping the killer to accomplish his task? I don't think Piratebay guys are any that naive. They know.

First of all, there are shops who legitimately sell guns and the owners are not held responsible for the uses of those guns. Secondly, software piracy doesn't kill people.

On a more precise note: Pirate Bay is a search engine. They don't host the files, they don't participate in the creation of those or anything like that. If they can be held accountable for the content found via their search engine, then ANY search engine can be held accountable for any illegal content found via it, including Google search. A simple Google search will give you thousands of links to illegal material, you can verify that even yourself. So, which one do you think is Right(TM): search engines only lists stuff they have found but aren't held accountable for the material since it's provided by others, or that search engines can be held accountable for such material and as such any search engine provider can be brought to court?

Reply Parent Score: 8

dagw Member since:
2005-07-06

If they can be held accountable for the content found via their search engine, then ANY search engine can be held accountable for any illegal content found via it, including Google search.

I saw an interview with someone from the prosecuting legal team where this question was asked. Basically they said that Google worked with the copyright holders and removed links when asked and tpb didn't. That was why they weren't going after Google. It wasn't so much about what could and couldn't be found as how they responded to take down requests that separated google from tpb. They further claimed that if google changed their policy they would go after google as well.

Reply Parent Score: 3

google_ninja Member since:
2006-02-05

I agree with you that technically, they didn't violate any copyright. I think there are miles between technically and morally or ethically right. They knew what they were doing was wrong, and they also knew that their countries laws were not up to date with the way things work nowadays and that they could get away with it.

It is hard to feel sorry for the poor RIAA or MPAA for getting ripped off, but on the other hand im not exactly going to shed a tear for these guys because they had the rug yanked out from under them.

Reply Parent Score: 2

alucinor Member since:
2006-01-06

I don't think it's much like handing a person a gun to shoot as it is like opening a gun store called "Cold Blooded Killers" and then being sued when someone buys a gun from your store and shoots someone.

Reply Parent Score: 3

ssa2204 Member since:
2006-04-22

If we only had fair prices on music & films, we would not go the alternative way.


The companies do not set the price, the market does. Basic econ 101. The reason you find them too high is simply because your fellow consumers have been willing to pay that amount.

A simple Google search will give you thousands of links to illegal material, you can verify that even yourself. So, which one do you think is Right(TM)


Except is Google actually hosting anything? Also what is Google's mission statement? I think it is vastly different than the one that is intended to promote piracy.

At then end of the day I personally just do not give a *$&@ about piracy. But what does really strike a nerve is the generation of today, the "Me" generation, the "Gimme gimme gimme free" generation of kids that have just grown up spoiled as hell and don't expect they should ever have to pay for anything. Movies, music, software, games, should all be provided for free. When kids today whine about copy right protection, DRM, etc.. then have the gall to whine about their beloved torrent site being taking away, well that is just way too much stupidity to allow.Hey dipshits, give you a cookie if you can figure out the connection between the two.

As for the Pirate Bay, my sympathy kind of went away when they A:) Named themselves Pirates, and B:) Visibly flaunted this by posting letters they received and their snarky responses. Quite simply they thought they were immune and above the law, and flaunted it in the face of everyone. They were cocky as hell and just asked for their legal troubles.

Reply Parent Score: 3

kurgan2001 Member since:
2008-12-31

The companies do not set the price, the market does. Basic econ 101. The reason you find them too high is simply because your fellow consumers have been willing to pay that amount.


True, but now people are waking up to that fact.

Except is Google actually hosting anything? Also what is Google's mission statement? I think it is vastly different than the one that is intended to promote piracy.


ummm .. heard of 'cached'??? It's stored on google's actual server.

At then end of the day I personally just do not give a *$&@ about piracy.


Then why quote and try to start a fight??

But what does really strike a nerve is the generation of today, the "Me" generation, the "Gimme gimme gimme free" generation of kids that have just grown up spoiled as hell and don't expect they should ever have to pay for anything. Movies, music, software, games, should all be provided for free.


I agree to a point. I'm 29 and I think everything is priced too high for my taste.

When kids today whine about copy right protection, DRM, etc.. then have the gall to whine about their beloved torrent site being taking away, well that is just way too much stupidity to allow.Hey dipshits, give you a cookie if you can figure out the connection between the two.


hmm .. let's see .. more DRM, copyright protection means that someone will crack it and post the cracked disk image on the torrent sites and that site will be shut down? Do I get my cookie?? lol.

I personally use no-cd and no-dvd cracks for my personal games (which I do buy) because I don't like leaving the cd and/or dvd in the drive all the time so as to lengthen the life of the disk. It has nothing to do with piracy on that.

As for the Pirate Bay, my sympathy kind of went away when they A:) Named themselves Pirates, and B:) Visibly flaunted this by posting letters they received and their snarky responses. Quite simply they thought they were immune and above the law, and flaunted it in the face of everyone. They were cocky as hell and just asked for their legal troubles.


Well yeah they could be cocky and immune because the law was different at the time. They weren't above the law at the time and could post whatever letters and responses they wanted. It's just recently the law changed and now they have to deal with it. ARRRRRRG.

Reply Parent Score: 3

quarkvanlepton Member since:
2008-03-08

But what does really strike a nerve is the generation of today, the "Me" generation, the "Gimme gimme gimme free" generation of kids that have just grown up spoiled as hell and don't expect they should ever have to pay for anything. Movies, music, software, games, should all be provided for free.

Kids you say... What decent grown-up man would think it's OK to capitalise on kids?

Hey dipshits,

... while calling them "dipshits"?

Reply Parent Score: 3

Surtur Member since:
2009-04-15

The companies do not set the price, the market does. Basic econ 101. The reason you find them too high is simply because your fellow consumers have been willing to pay that amount.


That is simply not true. While you will probably call me pedantic the statement should be like this:

"The companies do not set the price [in competitive markets], the market does."

This is just a major difference. If you don't believe me check your books. (Compare competitive markets vs. oligopoly vs. duopoly vs. monopolistic competition vs. monopoly and monopsony)

To be fair I have no idea if the market for music/films is a competitive market or not but in the form you stated it, it is simply not true.

Reply Parent Score: 1

cycoj Member since:
2007-11-04

"If we only had fair prices on music & films, we would not go the alternative way.


The companies do not set the price, the market does. Basic econ 101. The reason you find them too high is simply because your fellow consumers have been willing to pay that amount.

A simple Google search will give you thousands of links to illegal material, you can verify that even yourself. So, which one do you think is Right(TM)


Except is Google actually hosting anything? Also what is Google's mission statement? I think it is vastly different than the one that is intended to promote piracy.
"

Well TPB is not hosting anything either, so your point is?


At then end of the day I personally just do not give a *$&@ about piracy. But what does really strike a nerve is the generation of today, the "Me" generation, the "Gimme gimme gimme free" generation of kids that have just grown up spoiled as hell and don't expect they should ever have to pay for anything. Movies, music, software, games, should all be provided for free. When kids today whine about copy right protection, DRM, etc.. then have the gall to whine about their beloved torrent site being taking away, well that is just way too much stupidity to allow.Hey dipshits, give you a cookie if you can figure out the connection between the two.

As for the Pirate Bay, my sympathy kind of went away when they A:) Named themselves Pirates, and B:) Visibly flaunted this by posting letters they received and their snarky responses. Quite simply they thought they were immune and above the law, and flaunted it in the face of everyone. They were cocky as hell and just asked for their legal troubles.


There was a really good post a couple of days ago replying exactly to this argument. It's your generation (and mine probably), which created this greed. They are the generation which created the desire in the current generation to need everything, they are the generation profiting from this, they are the ones who put us in this mess we are in today.

Reply Parent Score: 1

Lousewort Member since:
2006-09-12

If you handed a gun for someone to shoot, wouldn't you be helping the killer to accomplish his task?


That's a loaded question :-)

A better analogy would be "should the municipality be held accountable for the bank robbery because they built the roads leading to the bank?"

The Louse

Edited 2009-04-23 18:50 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 1

bannor99 Member since:
2005-09-15

So gun shops should be held responsible for crimes committed with firearms.
Should the owners of Henckels et al do time for
stabbings?

What about Google, Live Search or LyGo?
Try typing "wolverine torrent" into any of
those search engines to see what gets returned.

Oh and let's sentence Bram Cohen to death,
that piracy-abetting f--ker!

Reply Parent Score: 1

Bounty Member since:
2006-09-18

So gun shops should be held responsible for crimes committed with firearms. Should the owners of Henckels et al do time for stabbings? What about Google, Live Search or LyGo? Try typing "wolverine torrent" into any of those search engines to see what gets returned. Oh and let's sentence Bram Cohen to death, that piracy-abetting f--ker!


Does the gun shop do background checks or check for age? If TPB was my local gun shop, they would check to see if I could legally own that movies before I DL'd it? I think the gun shop comparison is a little too abstract. I think any comparison needs to be digital to encompass the easy nature of copying files.

-Bounty

Reply Parent Score: 2

remek Member since:
2009-04-23

So according to You U.S. government is helping his citizens in killing?

Reply Parent Score: 1

tweakedenigma Member since:
2006-12-27

Thats kind of a ridiculous statement. Its right up there with McDonalds made me fat. People decided how to use tools that are provided too them and we can't blame the people that make them available if people use them in an illegal fashion.

Reply Parent Score: 2