PDA

View Full Version : Pirate Bay Founders Jailed



JP
17-04-2009, 12:59 PM
A court in Sweden has jailed four men behind The Pirate Bay (TPB), the world's most high-profile file-sharing website, in a landmark case.
Frederik Neij, Gottfrid Svartholm Warg, Carl Lundstrom and Peter Sunde were found guilty of breaking copyright law and were sentenced to a year in jail.
They were also ordered to pay 30m kronor (?2.4m) in damages.
In a Twitter posting, Sunde said: "Nothing will happen to TPB, this is just theatre for the media."
Sunde went on to say that he "got the news last night that we lost".
"It used to be only movies, now even verdicts are out before the official release."
The damages were awarded to a number of entertainment companies, including Warner Bros, Sony Music Entertainment, EMI, and Columbia Pictures.
However, the total awarded fell short of the 117m kronor (?9m) in damages and interest the firms were seeking
Speaking to the BBC, the chairman of industry body the International Federation of the Phonographic Industry (IFPI) John Kennedy said the verdict sent out a clear message.
"These guys weren't making a principled stand, they were out to line their own pockets. There was nothing meritorious about their behaviour, it was reprehensible.
"The Pirate Bay did immense harm and the damages awarded doesn't even get close to compensation, but we never claimed it did.
"There has been a perception that piracy is OK and that the music industry should just have to accept it. This verdict will change that," he said.
The four men denied the charges throughout the trial, saying that because they did not actually host any files, they were not doing anything wrong.
Speaking to the BBC earlier this week, Sunde said that there was no difference between us and Google."
"The Pirate Bay will continue. Nothing is going to happen if we lose, for a multitude for reasons, not least because we will immediately appeal," he said.
A lawyer for Carl Lundstrom, Per Samuelson told journalists he was shocked by the guilty verdict and the severity of the sentence.
"That's outrageous, in my point of view. Of course we will appeal," he was quoted as saying by Reuters news agency. "This is the first word, not the last. The last word will be ours."

Political issue
Rickard Falkvinge, leader of The Pirate Party - which is trying to reform laws around copyright and patents in the digital age - told the BBC that the verdict was "a gross injustice".
"This wasn't a criminal trial, it was a political trial. It is just gross beyond description that you can jail four people for providing infrastructure.
"There is a lot of anger in Sweden right now. File-sharing is an institution here and while I can't encourage people to break copyright law, I'm not following it and I don't agree with it.
"Today's events make file-sharing a hot political issue and we're going to take this to the European Parliament."
The Pirate Bay is the world's most high profile file-sharing website and was set up in 2003 by anti-copyright organisation Piratbyran, but for the last five years it has been run by individuals.
Millions of files are exchanged using the service every day.
No copyright content is hosted on The Pirate Bay's web servers; instead the site hosts "torrent" links to TV, film and music files held on its users' computers.

bbc.co.uk (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/8003799.stm)

cutmymilk
17-04-2009, 01:01 PM
Fair play to them, they have massive balls for how they have conducted themselves for the last few years.

Like clowns dancing towards a cliff, some may say.

bash
17-04-2009, 01:10 PM
Sorry to be a pedant but how is this a gaming headline?

Surely one for the off topic section?

Brats
17-04-2009, 01:12 PM
I'm glad they got banged up. Claiming innocence by saying they only provided the infrastructure is a rubbish defence. Calling the site 'Pirate Bay' probably didn't help their cause.

It won't change anything though. People with no ethics will still download stuff and other people will still provide the means for them to do so.

The Mole
17-04-2009, 01:14 PM
I did this exact subject for my university dissertation. I do not agree that these men should have been jailed, though at the same time they were aiding in the copyright breach. As they said in the statement, i feel the wrong people were convicted. After all if the files were not being hosted they would have nothing to link to.

The reasearch i did showed that people were willing to pay for easily obtained, legal content, as long as it was resonablly priced and easy to get hold of. I think the major companies have not worked out how to make money from the internet and that is not really our fault.

However things seam to be moving in the right direction on the music side with spotify and itunes, lets hope something happens on the movie/tvshow side. As for gaming, i think Nintendo and Apple are on the money with the stores they have for their respective devices. It is easier to purchase a game from the store, than it would be to ever install a rogue copy. People are not going to mind spending a few quid on a pick up and play game, which you can install anywhere with a wifi signal. You maybe on the train and looking for something to do and this is where the ease of downloading these titles comes into play as your never far away from a wifi hotspot.

huxley
17-04-2009, 01:18 PM
Lets be honest the media companys fighting the likes of the Pirate Bay just lost big time, the site will stay and all the free advertising about this case on the worlds major media networks is going to cause an explosion of new users.

Spatial
17-04-2009, 01:18 PM
Sorry to be a pedant but how is this a gaming headline?

Surely one for the off topic section?

This.

edit: now moved. Thanks mods :)

cutmymilk
17-04-2009, 01:22 PM
Lets be honest the media companys fighting the likes of the Pirate Bay just lost big time, the site will stay and all the free advertising about this case on the worlds major media networks is going to cause an explosion of new users.

I know, how can they lose and not be ordered that the site is shut down?!!

Brats
17-04-2009, 01:31 PM
I did this exact subject for my university dissertation. I do not agree that these men should have been jailed, though at the same time they were aiding in the copyright breach. As they said in the statement, i feel the wrong people were convicted. After all if the files were not being hosted they would have nothing to link to.

They are a big part of the system though. Without sites like Pirate Bay, file sharing wouldn't be as big as it is. It's a fair point to say that they were not solely responsible, but that isn't the same thing as saying the wrong people were jailed. They are responsible for their part and they rightly (imo) got jailed for it.


The reasearch i did showed that people were willing to pay for easily obtained, legal content, as long as it was resonablly priced and easy to get hold of. I think the major companies have not worked out how to make money from the internet and that is not really our fault.

There's a huge amount of research that shows that what people say they would do and what they would actually do bare no relation to one another. iTunes has been around for years, yet music piracy is worse than it has ever been.

Brad
17-04-2009, 01:37 PM
That's because iTune:

1. charges way too much for music
2. the quality is too poor.
3. Restrictive DRM up til recently

If they got their pricing right (and the music industry needs to be in on this too) then they'd do much better.

Dirty Sanchez
17-04-2009, 01:37 PM
What about the officers of ISPs? You would agree to them being jailed too?

JP
17-04-2009, 01:47 PM
It seems that they only did it to protect people from the multi-million dollar companies which I think is nice.

Perhaps the million dollar profits made each year by the company running the site should be given to the same people they are trying so hard to protect from all those disgusting capitalist companies?

Are they still trying to buy a country (http://www.thelocal.se/6076/20070112/)? I'd love them to do that as they'd soon discover how difficult it is to run a country, even one that small. I'd be happy to put money on their country collapsing within the first year or ending up having far more draconian laws than the ones they are sacrificing so much to protect the world from.

Brats
17-04-2009, 01:48 PM
That's because iTune:

1. charges way too much for music
2. the quality is too poor.
3. Restrictive DRM up til recently

If they got their pricing right (and the music industry needs to be in on this too) then they'd do much better.

iTunes do very well, but it still doesn't stop a lot of people feeling fine about paying nothing for stuff. iTunes could be a quarter of the price but still most people who download for free would continue to do so.

Music is a lot cheaper than it used to be and yet there is more pirating than ever. Pirating has less to do with price and more to do with the means and will to do it.

I've been called a 'mug' numerous times by people who can't understand why I would rather pay for stuff :rolleyes:.


What about the officers of ISPs? You would agree to them being jailed too?

I don't know how it works, but if the ISPs know who is pirating and could chose to stop it but don't then yes they are partly guilty too.

If I own a hidden underground bunker and knowingly chose to rent it out to criminals to store their stolen goods, then I'm partly involved in the crime and have no right to cry when I get banged up for it.

Dogg Thang
17-04-2009, 01:53 PM
iTunes charges way too much for music? A tenner? That's too much for an album you'll listen to how many times?

The lack of value placed on good music these days is crazy. It's more likely that the drop in value is caused by pirating and the perception that it should be free than the price of music itself being the cause of piracy. It's just used as an excuse because pirates don't like to think of themselves as doing anything wrong.

Edit: Sorry, I should have checked prices first. Not a tenner. 8 quid.

Mayhem
17-04-2009, 02:02 PM
I wonder if Google should be taken to court now because you can find plenty of pirate material using that as well... there's a great couple of music sites I use called Seeqpod and Sad Steve that work looking for music only. Helped find MP3s of some reasonably obscure tracks in the past.

And if TPB doth fall in the future, then another one will only spring up in its place... discounting all the other torrent sites still out there.

Guts
17-04-2009, 02:08 PM
I wonder if Google should be taken to court now because you can find plenty of pirate material using that as well...

I was thinking the same. And how about that YouTube thing? Man, the copyright infringements there... So how about we jail those Google guys and those who founded YouTube? After all they got A HUNDRED MILLION DOLLARS for their site.

Brats
17-04-2009, 02:08 PM
iTunes charges way too much for music? A tenner? That's too much for an album you'll listen to how many times?

The lack of value placed on good music these days is crazy. It's more likely that the drop in value is caused by pirating and the perception that it should be free than the price of music itself being the cause of piracy. It's just used as an excuse because pirates don't like to think of themselves as doing anything wrong.

Edit: Sorry, I should have checked prices first. Not a tenner. 8 quid.

I 100% agree. The 'value' of so much these days it put down to what it costs to make, rather than the true value of what you get from it. I have albums that have changed my life. If I lived my life again, I'd gladly pay ?1,000 for them.

Brats
17-04-2009, 02:10 PM
I was thinking the same. And how about that YouTube thing? Man, the copyright infringements there... So how about we jail those Google guys and those who founded YouTube? After all they got A HUNDRED MILLION DOLLARS for their site.

Isn't the difference that if someone raises a copyright infringement concern to Youtube, they remove it?

charlesr
17-04-2009, 02:11 PM
Is it illegal to stand on a street corner and point out the fact that there's someone down the next road selling weed?

CMcK
17-04-2009, 02:11 PM
iTunes isn't to blame for piracy being rampant.

1. Prices are determined by the labels.
2. 256k AAC is better than the average 128k MP3 that are in widespread use. People just don't give a toss about quality anyway or CD's would still be king. The kit that the labels use to encode stuff for iTunes has supported lossless for a while. They just chose not to use it.
3. iTunes is DRM free now and your average punter has no idea at all what DRM is anyway.

I agree with The Mole if I could buy albums from iTunes in Apple Lossless or .wav I probably wouldn't ever buy another CD. Same goes for TV and films. If stuff was available to download at the same time and quality as the DVD / Blu-ray and priced sensibly why ever buy another physical disc?

Guts
17-04-2009, 02:21 PM
I agree with The Mole if I could buy albums from iTunes in Apple Lossless or .wav I probably wouldn't ever buy another CD. Same goes for TV and films. If stuff was available to download at the same time and quality as the DVD / Blu-ray and priced sensibly why ever buy another physical disc?

Because it's nice to look at all those movies/records/games lined neatly on the shelves? It's nicer to own a physical product than just 126.35 MB of data on your hard drive.

It's not ecological or economical but that's how many people are.

charlesr
17-04-2009, 02:26 PM
These threads have a danger of repeating themselves. Shall we keep this one to discussion of this particular case and its impacts?

Brad
17-04-2009, 02:31 PM
iTunes charges way too much for music? A tenner? That's too much for an album you'll listen to how many times?

The lack of value placed on good music these days is crazy. It's more likely that the drop in value is caused by pirating and the perception that it should be free than the price of music itself being the cause of piracy. It's just used as an excuse because pirates don't like to think of themselves as doing anything wrong.

Edit: Sorry, I should have checked prices first. Not a tenner. 8 quid.

Yes. It's too expensive. For digital files of a lower quality than CD, with no physical media, no artwork and no sleeve notes. No shelf storage costs or high street shop required.

I buy my CDs from a local indie shop for between £5 and £10. If my Hard disc ever fails I still have all my music.

I'm not devaluing the actual music. Some music is priceless to me. I'm saying that compared to buying a CD downloading music from iTunes is extremely poor value for money.

EDIT: Charles is right. Sorry if I took this off topic.

JP
17-04-2009, 02:35 PM
Is it illegal to stand on a street corner and point out the fact that there's someone down the next road selling weed?
Wouldn't you rather report the crime rather than take part in assisting the criminal in making money?

Kit
17-04-2009, 03:02 PM
Free distribution is the way forward - you need only look at the Youtube film deal or South Park - but cutting the makers out of advertising revenue while making millions? :S

Kinda goes against their hippy ethos.

mikewl
17-04-2009, 03:25 PM
I would give a damn but I believe the music industry makes plenty, they should just accept piracy is gonna happen.

Personally I get most my music/tv from Itunes but thats because I dont mind paying for it, however I couldn't care less if someone else prefers to go the free route, enough people do buy to line the industry with many millions and keep the artists living in homes fit for a king.

All alot of fuss over nothing really.

honeymustard
17-04-2009, 03:48 PM
They haven't been jailed, they'll appeal and that'll take ages. And the site stays, so all they've achieved is publicising the website.

JP
17-04-2009, 03:57 PM
One of the main problems is that P2P file sharing is done legitimately by some upcoming bands and it's those people who could end up being made to suffer for the sake of the pirates.:(

abigsmurf
17-04-2009, 03:59 PM
Is it illegal to stand on a street corner and point out the fact that there's someone down the next road selling weed?

Yes. Could easily be classed as facilitating a drugs transaction which is definately illegal in the US.

Sucks they've been punished but they were relying on a rather shaky loophole for it to be legal. They were undoubtedly against the spirit of the law.

funkydan
17-04-2009, 04:03 PM
I would give a damn but I believe the music industry makes plenty, they should just accept piracy is gonna happen.

That's like saying someone who owns a house and has nice things should just accept that they are gonna get burgled - as if they deserve it!


Personally I get most my music/tv from Itunes but thats because I dont mind paying for it, however I couldn't care less if someone else prefers to go the free route, enough people do buy to line the industry with many millions and keep the artists living in homes fit for a king.

All alot of fuss over nothing really.

That may be the case for bands etc that have already made it, but how are the newer bands to succeed if no one is actually buying their music?

I think the music industry has already realised this in fact and knows that concerts and gigs are the only way forward if you want to make any money, but that again doesn't really assist the bands who are trying to make it.

Everyone (of any worth) starts with nothing in this industry - but if no one is buying the music, how on earth is it possible to get anywhere? Yeah you can do big arena gigs but the smaller bands can't! They still have to work there way up, so you see, it DOES matter if someone decides to 'go the free route'!!

Or do you only buy music from massive bands in order to fund what is your, quite frankly, ridiculous theory?! :rolleyes:

Sorry if I've taken things OT again!!

mikewl
17-04-2009, 04:39 PM
That's like saying someone who owns a house and has nice things should just accept that they are gonna get burgled - as if they deserve it!



That may be the case for bands etc that have already made it, but how are the newer bands to succeed if no one is actually buying their music?

I think the music industry has already realised this in fact and knows that concerts and gigs are the only way forward if you want to make any money, but that again doesn't really assist the bands who are trying to make it.

Everyone (of any worth) starts with nothing in this industry - but if no one is buying the music, how on earth is it possible to get anywhere? Yeah you can do big arena gigs but the smaller bands can't! They still have to work there way up, so you see, it DOES matter if someone decides to 'go the free route'!!

Or do you only buy music from massive bands in order to fund what is your, quite frankly, ridiculous theory?! :rolleyes:

Sorry if I've taken things OT again!!

I guess the distribution of funds from the record labels is all wrong then, stop paying so much to the top artists and share the wealth to some degree.

As I said though I think enough people do buy music and its just a fact that piracy will happen, what can you do to stop it, if people dont wanna pay they wont.

Eight Rooks
17-04-2009, 04:48 PM
Definitely more free publicity for the site than anything else, and put me down for having little sympathy for the way major labels, studios etc. set out their case(s). But they did facilitate piracy and they should have known they were running the risk of this happening, whether or not the long-term effects on piracy in general are non-existent. At least TPB tend more towards the "Piracy? Yes? And? Hahaha, **** right off" side of things, rather than that prick who runs Isohunt, who has to be one of the most arrogant, self-centred, deluded internet personalities I've ever come across. If you stand on a street corner loudly pointing out there's a giant warehouse down the next alleyway full of stolen goods, if dealing in stolen goods is illegal, you are a ****ing party to the actions of whoever wanders down that alleyway and helps themselves. End. Of. Story. It makes no difference whatsoever who put them there, or if there's also a free lemonade stand in there or something. It baffles me people cannot or will not see this. Baffles me. >_<

funkydan
17-04-2009, 04:55 PM
I guess the distribution of funds from the record labels is all wrong then, stop paying so much to the top artists and share the wealth to some degree.

That'll never happen, especially not in the States, as it's one very small step away from Communism, and you know how much that scares our colonial chums!

MattyD
17-04-2009, 05:02 PM
I can't believe there are people in this thread defending people who made a name for themselves facilitating crime on a global scale.

I don't like restrictive DRM or the unfair pricing either but you don't see me out there helping every Tom, Dick and Harry to rip music and burn dodgy DVDs for sale at the market.

eastyy
17-04-2009, 05:12 PM
its Kindoff weird though ......when it comes to piracy....people who buy the game/film ...and are then restricted on how many Times they can install it.....or on films having to sit through that anti piracy things

Feels weird that the people who do actually buy the stuff....are penalised....and the people who pirate it ...they get all the annoying stuff on games and films removed

JP
17-04-2009, 05:16 PM
I think it's important to separate the moral & the legal side of piracy as the law doesn't necessarily dictate what is morally right or wrong.

If something is illegal then I have to accept the rules of the country that I've chosen to be part of, I'm choosing to be a part of that community and get the benefits of that so it's the rules of that community that I've chosen to follow.

If I don't like the rules of that community then either do what I can to change them or I choose not be a member any longer and to also not reap the benefits of being a member.

What I really object to is that people try to justify piracy with all sorts of stupid reasons. The people on Pirate Bay are trying to justify themselves and you see similar excuses when the matter is brought up on here:

1 ) It's too expensive.
Bollocks! If something is not worth the asking price whether that's on-line, in a shop or inside somebody else's house that doesn't give you the legal right to just take it.

2) These companies are making enough money anyway.
I can understand why people don't like the idea of capitalism but if you don't like it that much then please don't get the benefits of a capitalist society. Nobody is putting a limit on what you earn, things you own aren't going to be given away free to people by the state just because you're earning enough to get by each day.

3) Other pirate sites are going to do it anyway.
I'm not even going to bother with the inadequacies of that one & where we'd be if people had that attitude about other things.

4) I've spent enough with them anyway, I shouldn't need to have to spend anything else.
I can't really comment on that one as I don't actually understand what it means.

5) It doesn't really hurt anybody.
I'm presuming that as companies are spending millions globally to try and prevent piracy that somebody, somewhere is getting hit when people pirate stuff.

I HAVE LOADS OF PIRATED COPIES!

I have a collection of just over 40 CDs on my desk right next to me now which I've chosen to pirate. It's collections of quite a few unreleased cuts, studio tracks & concerts from bands which have not yet an official release.

I don't use sites such as Pirate Bay because I usually get hold of the unreleased stuff through trades with other collectors like myself.

I've been collecting LPs & CDs for absolutely years and will have spent thousands and thousands on them during that time.

Even though this stuff is unreleased & even though I've spent stupid amounts of money over the years on these bands I don't for one second doubt that I still have absolutely no legal right to have this stuff.

If any of it did get an official release then I assure you that I would be the first person in the line to buy a proper version of the tracks just as I have been in the past.

I've got a lovely collection of CPS1/CPS2/MVS ROMs on my PSP at the moment and I'm sort of thinking about trying to run some SNES ROMs of my DSi if it's possible.

Now given a choice I would happily buy the official versions of the games just as I did when I bought Chrono Trigger for the DS last week. (Off topic but, it's a brilliant game for anybody who's interested).

None of this gives me any right at all to have downloaded files from the & I really wouldn't dare try to justify that I've copied them for the 5 reasons I listed above or any others, they are nothing but excuses!

The one and only reason that I have pirated copies of these things is because I have made the choice to have pirated copies of them and nothing else is relevant. I've never hidden the fact that I do this and if I was pulled in by the police tomorrow for piracy then I'm not going to make excuses because I have none.

It really pisses me off that people try so hard to justify their piracy with pathetic excuses whenever the subject comes up. If you support piracy then that's your moral choice to do that, but please don't use a load of ****ty excuses for doing it.

You made the choice to do it, end of story!!

mikewl
17-04-2009, 05:18 PM
its Kindoff weird though ......when it comes to piracy....people who buy the game/film ...and are then restricted on how many Times they can install it.....or on films having to sit through that anti piracy things

Feels weird that the people who do actually buy the stuff....are penalised....and the people who pirate it ...they get all the annoying stuff on games and films removed

That anti piracy ad is the most annoying thing on dvds, especially when they stop you going to the menu during it, even more on tv boxsets when its on every single disc.

eastyy
17-04-2009, 05:20 PM
Yeah i got a dara o briain stand up dvd....but it had the anti piracy think after i had watched the show....which i didnt mind at all then

Dogg Thang
17-04-2009, 05:24 PM
I'm with you on the excuses, John. What this comes down to is not right or wrong - because those doing it will do their damndest to justify it, as you've said. It comes down to how easy it is and how there are little to no consequences.

I knew a guy who took popcorn from the movies without paying. His justification? Cost. And, yeah, movie popcorn is a total rip-off but the real reason he was doing it was because it was so easy. The cost thing was just a justification to ease the conscience.

Things will change if prosecution becomes far more frequent and sentences get harsher. I reckon whole perceptions will change. Yes, there will always be people doing it, just as there are still people shoplifting, murdering, whatever. But this total rampant seen as perfectly normal piracy that goes on will vanish if the law is actually enforced.

And that's actually the only thing I can see happening. I think that is where this will go.

mikewl
17-04-2009, 05:34 PM
I HAVE LOADS OF PIRATED COPIES!

I have a collection of just over 40 CDs on my desk right next to me which I've chosen to pirate. It's collections of quite a few unreleased cuts, studio tracks & concerts from bands which have not yet an official release.



Its still piracy though mate, maybe with your strict viewpoints mentioned at the top of your post you should just force yourself to be patient and wait for the official releases, maybe pirating them beforehand reduces the likelyhood of these things getting an official release.

Im not trying to be a dick, I agree with what you said about your pirated goods and your reasoning but it should go up there with your other list of excuses people use.

Anyway, I have soft views on it all but lets be honest piracy has always been going on, why stress over it, its the studios issue and all you can do yourself is what you feel is right, which is why I buy my stuff, but getting shirty because others dont is a waste of energy, piracy will always be a huge factor and those companys that can accept and work around it will be the ones that have success.

As for the guys on The Pirate Bay they are full of it, bull****e excuses and all that, the fact is they are a bunch of bums looking for an easy way through life, I dont admire these guys and I dont like them but there will always be these type of people doing these type of things.

JP
17-04-2009, 05:46 PM
It is piracy, which I mentioned in my post.

I have no legal right at all to have those in my possession, which I mentioned in my post.

I have no excuses to own them, which I mentioned in my post.

It's extremely unlikely that most will get an official release. Admitedly, the Velvet Underground's Quine Tapes were released in 2001...22 years after they were recorded and I bought the box set the day they were released.

That doesn't give me the right to of had the tapes on CD until that day in 2001 when I bought the box set.

I chose to pirate them, it was my choice and stating that it was due to them not having an official release or that I would buy them if they did eventually get a release would be not be accepted.

What I did was legally wrong but I'm not prepared to hide behind any ****ty excuses for doing what I did.

mikewl
17-04-2009, 05:52 PM
It is piracy, which I mentioned in my post.

I have no legal right at all to have those in my possession, which I mentioned in my post.

I have no excuses to own them, which I mentioned in my post.

It's extremely unlikely that most will get an official release. Admitedly, the Velvet Underground's Quine Tapes were released in 2001...22 years after they were recorded and I bought the box set the day they were released.

That doesn't give me the right to of had the tapes on CD until that day in 2001 when I bought the box set.

I chose to pirate them, it was my choice and stating that it was due to them not having an official release or that I would buy them if they did eventually get a release would be not be accepted.

What I did was legally wrong but I'm not prepared to hide behind any ****ty excuses for doing what I did.

I have no problem with that, but it is an excuse for pirating just like all those other examples.

JP
17-04-2009, 05:57 PM
What is it you think I'm excusing?

mikewl
17-04-2009, 06:05 PM
What is it you think I'm excusing?

I dont know mate, just you have some harsh words against other forms of piracy but then have your own piracy collection but thats ok because "Insert whatever excuse".

Its an excuse the same as those who pirate because things are too expensive, in their mind they feel its ok too.

Anyway im done with this subject, people are far too strongly opinionated on it.

JP
17-04-2009, 06:16 PM
The sort of piracy that I'm doing is legally wrong, there is no such thing as good piracy. I'm not asking for forgiveness by making excuses, I've been straight about it, what I'm doing is WRONG! I have harsh words against ALL forms of piracy.

I can't put really put it any simpler than that.

Spatial
17-04-2009, 06:39 PM
This is the worst case of online self-flagellation I've ever seen.

Malavon
17-04-2009, 06:51 PM
I have a collection of just over 40 CDs on my desk right next to me now which I've chosen to pirate. It's collections of quite a few unreleased cuts, studio tracks & concerts from bands which have not yet an official release.

I don't use sites such as Pirate Bay because I usually get hold of the unreleased stuff through trades with other collectors like myself.

I've been collecting LPs & CDs for absolutely years and will have spent thousands and thousands on them during that time.

Even though this stuff is unreleased & even though I've spent stupid amounts of money over the years on these bands I don't for one second doubt that I still have absolutely no legal right to have this stuff.

If any of it did get an official release then I assure you that I would be the first person in the line to buy a proper version of the tracks just as I have been in the past.

I've got a lovely collection of CPS1/CPS2/MVS ROMs on my PSP at the moment and I'm sort of thinking about trying to run some SNES ROMs of my DSi if it's possible.

Now given a choice I would happily buy the official versions of the games just as I did when I bought Chrono Trigger for the DS last week. (Off topic but, it's a brilliant game for anybody who's interested).

None of this gives me any right at all to have downloaded files from the & I really wouldn't dare try to justify that I've copied them for the 5 reasons I listed above or any others, they are nothing but excuses!

The one and only reason that I have pirated copies of these things is because I have made the choice to have pirated copies of them and nothing else is relevant. I've never hidden the fact that I do this and if I was pulled in by the police tomorrow for piracy then I'm not going to make excuses because I have none.

It really pisses me off that people try so hard to justify their piracy with pathetic excuses whenever the subject comes up. If you support piracy then that's your moral choice to do that, but please don't use a load of ****ty excuses for doing it.

You made the choice to do it, end of story!!

Don't you realize that you spent the majority of that rant making excuses for why you've pirated music, games etc, and thus doing exactly what you "hate" other people doing?

Maybe they think they have legitimate reasons too.

JP
17-04-2009, 07:18 PM
:D As I've mentioned a few times, there are no legitimate reasons for piracy it's legally wrong how ever people choose present their excuses to say that it's right.

MisterBubbles
17-04-2009, 07:24 PM
Well said Capn Parry now hoist that jolly roger LOL
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3A19q7rysLs&feature=related


a

honeymustard
17-04-2009, 07:28 PM
I guess the discussion has drifted so I'll throw in my thoughts on piracy now...

I rarely pirate things, but when I do, it's like this: games; I did pirate some DS games, to try them out. Every game I have enjoyed I have purchased. Every game that I didn't like, I haven't. If Nintendo provided me with a very easy way to play demos (I know there's a ****ty way using the Wii), then I wouldn't have pirated those games. PC games I will pirate, but only if they're not on Steam. For example - I bought both of the Oddworld games on Steam (and I could have easily pirated those), but I pirated Thief because it wasn't there. All of the games I pirate are really old and could probably be bought from Sold Out for a few quid, but yeah, so much easier. Music; most of the stuff I pirate is extremely rare and isn't readily available... again, comes down to ease, I suppose. Films; rarely, but if I do, it's because the cinema is just stupid. The whole concept I find is ridiculous. Why do film studios only give you ONE way of viewing their film when it first comes out? The cinema experience for me really is horrible. If I could pay a few quid to stream them whilst they are also in the cinema, then I would, without question. But no, they allow me to do this months after the film has come out - why bother waiting?

KIT786
17-04-2009, 10:43 PM
Heres one that i've never quite been sure of: Is recording programs from the TV to Video tape/DVD/your PC piracy? As you are making a copy of something without the copyright holders permission, or am i missing somethinh here?

huxley
17-04-2009, 11:18 PM
Well the pirate bay site has done a good thing, which is to shake up the movie and music companys and maybe help them to rethink the price structures of their products in future. As this case will do nothing but boost the profile of bittorrent sites.
As for me I`ve downloaded about 50 or so cds that I purchased about 10 years ago as and they have all gone yellow peeled. Tomorrows world lied to me "last forever" my arse.

cutmymilk
17-04-2009, 11:42 PM
Heres one that i've never quite been sure of: Is recording programs from the TV to Video tape/DVD/your PC piracy? As you are making a copy of something without the copyright holders permission, or am i missing somethinh here?

Yep technically illegal. Not illegal to sell blank tapes but illegal to use them to tape a film off TV, for example. Though there is a 'fair usage' clause somewhere that says its ok for about 2 weeks or so.

Basically they're all stupid laws that have never been enforced.

Strider
17-04-2009, 11:58 PM
My biggest problem with itunes (and most digital content in general) is that I personally feela lot of it is too highly priced. There's no way I'll pay &#163;8 for an album when I can get a physical CD for the same price (sometimes cheaper). Same with stuff like Burnout on the PS3. Why pay &#163;25 quid for it when you can it in the shops for &#163;12 it makes no sense.

The appstore seems to have it right, with decent prices and the ability to change them when needed. I'm sure people will disagree with me, but I'm sure there's just as many who feel the same. Oh and I also think people torrenting tv shows is wrong as well.

wonderboy
18-04-2009, 12:08 AM
Technically, it's illegal to rip a cd to your iTunes library and sync it with your ipod ! Well in the uk...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/8000876.stm

:)

Just thinking about iTunes. Wouldn't it be great when you bought an Album. You get a physical copy in the post, as an option, for a small fee !?

Daniel
18-04-2009, 01:14 AM
After freely downloading virtually 100% of the movies and music i own for the past 10yrs, there is no way in hell i would go back to paying extortionate amounts for cds and dvds.

Sure i know what i do is wrong, but i reckon years of paying middle men for doing sweet f*&k all still leaves me in the red while they have enjoyed a profitable ride. And what do they do when it all threatens to come to an end - they cry foul and sue people. They had the money and the brands to embrace a new way of delivering content but instead of accepting change they put up the barriers and defend their meaningless turf. Good riddance. Even $1 per song on itunes is the same rate i'd be paying for a CD with booklet and jewel case. I don't mind companies making fair profit, but apple must be laughing all the way to the bank with that.

As for movies suffering. Last i heard the hollywood stars still commanded million dollar salaries, and i don't recall that many indy movies making it to the local cinemas back when we were all on dial-up. How much did it cost to make this years best film oscar winner? Great films never needed massive budgets, it was just easier for studios to throw money at a movie through special effects and marketing.

I don't much care if it damages either industry since as far as i know both industries have a better track record in promoting garbage than encouraging art. It's mainly that i will never again value a movie or album at more than $2 or $3 since if i'm downloading the content i don't see why i should pay publishing, manufacturing and distribution costs for products that require none of those things.

GMass
18-04-2009, 11:47 AM
*yawn*

Champloo
18-04-2009, 11:48 AM
Sure i know what i do is wrong, but i reckon years of paying middle men for doing sweet f*&k all still leaves me in the red while they have enjoyed a profitable ride.

How do they do **** all? Countless artists wouldn't be around if they hadn't been picked up by record labels. Why do you think the likes of Stones Throw, Warp, Touch and Go etc etc etc have such a good reputation? Labels do a lot more than exploit the artists or the consumers.

Kit
18-04-2009, 03:38 PM
I can’t stand seeing games being pirated. Devs salaries seem within reason of what they do, and at the end of the day, they're just normal people (in what I imagine) is a semi-normal working environment. Movie’s and music though, I still think it’s wrong, but when you see the ridiculous money being thrown at actors and ‘artists’ (seriously Britney Spears an artist?) you lose sympathy. Tom Cruise for instance, he get’s what, &#163;20 million for half an hours worth of screen time? that’s ridiculous. We put way too much value on these ‘talents’, and I apply the same logic to football; I hope all the Premiership streaming results in a huge drop in footballers salaries/ ticket prices.

Not that it justifies piracy, but when there’s decent offers on the table from Google/Youtube (hey, they’re not doing too bad giving away a free product), you do wonder whether it’s greed keeping them from doing the same.

GMass
18-04-2009, 03:48 PM
*yawn*

huxley
18-04-2009, 05:14 PM
After freely downloading virtually 100% of the movies and music i own for the past 10yrs, there is no way in hell i would go back to paying extortionate amounts for cds and dvds.

Sure i know what i do is wrong, but i reckon years of paying middle men for doing sweet f*&k all still leaves me in the red while they have enjoyed a profitable ride. And what do they do when it all threatens to come to an end - they cry foul and sue people. They had the money and the brands to embrace a new way of delivering content but instead of accepting change they put up the barriers and defend their meaningless turf. Good riddance. Even $1 per song on itunes is the same rate i'd be paying for a CD with booklet and jewel case. I don't mind companies making fair profit, but apple must be laughing all the way to the bank with that.

As for movies suffering. Last i heard the hollywood stars still commanded million dollar salaries, and i don't recall that many indy movies making it to the local cinemas back when we were all on dial-up. How much did it cost to make this years best film oscar winner? Great films never needed massive budgets, it was just easier for studios to throw money at a movie through special effects and marketing.

I don't much care if it damages either industry since as far as i know both industries have a better track record in promoting garbage than encouraging art. It's mainly that i will never again value a movie or album at more than $2 or $3 since if i'm downloading the content i don't see why i should pay publishing, manufacturing and distribution costs for products that require none of those things.

WTF! So do you go shoplifting as well?

Champloo
18-04-2009, 06:10 PM
I can?t stand seeing games being pirated. Devs salaries seem within reason of what they do, and at the end of the day, they're just normal people (in what I imagine) is a semi-normal working environment. Movie?s and music though, I still think it?s wrong, but when you see the ridiculous money being thrown at actors and ?artists? (seriously Britney Spears an artist?) you lose sympathy. Tom Cruise for instance, he get?s what, ?20 million for half an hours worth of screen time? that?s ridiculous. We put way too much value on these ?talents?, and I apply the same logic to football; I hope all the Premiership streaming results in a huge drop in footballers salaries/ ticket prices.

:s

Since when was the music business synonymous with Britney Spears, or the movie industry with Tom Cruise?

I think you'll find most musicians are normal people, that many of the most talented are broke, and that they would certainly be doing a lot better if people paid for their product.

More to the point, when you download an album you are stealing from far more people than the artist themselves. There are plenty of 'normal people' involved in the production and distribution of an album, or a movie, that serve roles analogous to your above-mentioned game devs.

JammyD
18-04-2009, 06:37 PM
WTF! So do you go shoplifting as well?

http://s.buzzfeed.com/static/imagebuzz/2008/8/27/12/27311d2d7c84e8f3e3f5036ed08d198b.jpg

huxley
18-04-2009, 06:55 PM
Obtaining something with a value with no intention of ever paying for it is theft.

Tbh I`m shocked at some of the opinions posted in this thread, Despite my sometimes stupid comments I`m glad to see I have higher standards of honesty than some of the other people on this site that I used to look up to with regards to their gaming knowledge etc, My opinion has changed big time.
Isnt it time this thread was locked and forgotten before it gets nasty?

Kit
18-04-2009, 07:03 PM
Edit: Nvm.

Post was more about pay hierarchy than piracy.

Basically:

Over valuing actors/artists/footballers = bad
Piracy = bad
Middle men = bad
More direct way of artists getting paid = good. :)

sj33
18-04-2009, 07:43 PM
:D As I've mentioned a few times, there are no legitimate reasons for piracy it's legally wrong how ever people choose present their excuses to say that it's right.
I don't support piracy, but we should recognise the difference between 'legally wrong' and 'morally/ethically wrong' They're not interchangable.

Not trying to rip into you or anything, nor am I trying to condone piracy, but we should recognise that the law doesn't necessarily represent the so-called moral/ethical 'good' (which is somewhat subjective anyway). I've always considered using legal reasoning to justify/deride opinions with a moral/ethical basis (for example, whether piracy is justifyable) to be a red herring.

Dogg Thang
18-04-2009, 07:55 PM
Perpetrators often have a twisted moral code in order to justify their behaviour. A pirate arguing whether piracy is justifiable is about as worthwhile as a serial killer arguing why killing gay prostitutes is good for the world.

averybluemonkey
18-04-2009, 08:33 PM
Piracy puts people out of work plain and simple.

Buying a consumer product like a DVD or CD is a small impact to the consumer in terms of cost, pirating it saves the consumer a small amount of money. However, it has a catastrophic impact on the producers.

Kit
18-04-2009, 09:11 PM
Piracy isn’t justifiable but arguing for a free means of viewing content is, and if you’re of the opinion it’s not then you’re behind with the times.

It’s going to be a difficult transition as people from older generations see it as theft, but if the artist (god I hate that term) is still getting paid and living comfortably what’s the problem? Do you really, honestly think Sony and Viacom would be giving away free media if they weren’t making money?

As I said in my previous post, and Shakey put more eloquently, with there being no real deterrent or policing atm it’s left to a moral choice. Once both sides discover the most efficient way of making money ( watched an excellent series about Silicon Valley that touched on the subject) most content will be free.

mikewl
18-04-2009, 10:11 PM
Piracy puts people out of work plain and simple.

Buying a consumer product like a DVD or CD is a small impact to the consumer in terms of cost, pirating it saves the consumer a small amount of money. However, it has a catastrophic impact on the producers.

I think one of the problems is that its hard for people to recognise this when people keep hearing about how rich and wealthy some actors/musicians are.

There is definetely alot of resentment towards the famous and the spoils they receive and I think as long as this image is being portrayed by them then many people will continue to feel fine about pirating.

Really there is nothing that will change peoples viewpoints on it all, which is why I just think accept it/work around it, as far as games you have more deterrents now to pirating due to online services, steam surely is a great way to stop pc game piracy as far as I know and these companies have worked around the issues and have had success.

As far as movies and music, well seriously they need to get working as right now its quite bad, once again a new medium has been released in Bluray and the first thing they do is hike the prices to exploit the early adopters, those looking to buy online downloads are faced with no real benefit as once again they charge full price and exploit those using that method, to many legit purchasers there must be an underlying feeling of being ripped the **** off.

Its in their hands to persuade the public back into buying things, whether this is the way it should be or not it is the way it is, lets see how they do.

KIT786
18-04-2009, 11:37 PM
Yep technically illegal. Not illegal to sell blank tapes but illegal to use them to tape a film off TV, for example. Though there is a 'fair usage' clause somewhere that says its ok for about 2 weeks or so.

Basically they're all stupid laws that have never been enforced.

Thanks for clearing that up.

The way I see it is, if you've already brought a phyical CD or got it via itunes (or whatever) then you should be able to make as many copies (or download the same cd via torrents) as many times as you want as you've paid the artist for their work.

EDIT: Just to mak it clear, my problem is with DRM and once you've paid for something you should be able to do what you want with it rather than be restricted and if you are restricted then gte yourself an unrestritive copy of that work

JP
19-04-2009, 11:14 AM
I don't support piracy, but we should recognise the difference between 'legally wrong' and 'morally/ethically wrong' They're not interchangable.

Not trying to rip into you or anything, nor am I trying to condone piracy, but we should recognise that the law doesn't necessarily represent the so-called moral/ethical 'good' (which is somewhat subjective anyway). I've always considered using legal reasoning to justify/deride opinions with a moral/ethical basis (for example, whether piracy is justifyable) to be a red herring.
All of which I've mention in my posts which began with the following sentence...

I think it's important to separate the moral & the legal side of piracy as the law doesn't necessarily dictate what is morally right or wrong.
:rolleyes:

charlesr
24-04-2009, 12:02 PM
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/04/23/pirate_bay_judge_accused_of_bias/

"[The Judge], Norstr&#246;m is signed up to the Swedish Copyright Association (Svenska f&#246;reningen f&#246;r upphovsr&#228;tt), which also counts Henrik Pont&#233;n, Peter Danowsky and Monique Wadsted as members. All three represented the entertainment industry in the case against BitTorrent tracker site The Pirate Bay"

You'd think the prosecution would think of checking this sort of stuff in advance (presuming they didn't know already, which is a dodgy assumption). Trials are expensive.

Looks like there will have to be a retrial if they appeal.

abigsmurf
24-04-2009, 12:08 PM
May not be as big a deal as it sounds

If the Judge ever published a book or paper (not that unlikely), he may have been required to sign up. He may not be actively involved.

JP
24-04-2009, 02:01 PM
I'm not sure how this stuff works bu I'm not really sure what point they are trying to make?

As pointed out below, there could well be many organisations that somebody in hos position would need to sign up to so that alone doesn't mean anything.

That organisation is there to ensure that the law is used to prevent copyright theft appropriately, he's a judge and everything he does professionally is supposed to be uphold the law appropriately so wanting to uphold copyright laws isn't exactly special.

He could also have signed up to the Swedish Association Against Murdering People and that wouldn't put him in a difficult position if he was taking part in a murder trial.

I'm certainly not an expert but I'm personally not seeing anything wrong with what happened.

Papercut
24-04-2009, 02:32 PM
You'd imagine that the Swedish Copyright Association is some partisan media industry funded group aimed at lobbying pro-copyright industry viewpoints, regardless of legal merit - the Judge might well have been on the pay of the same media companies that brought the case to court.

I doubt it is a bunch of individuals who have formed an association to extol the virtues of Sweden's copyright law borne purely from a sense of civic duty.

... although if anyone was to fit that unlikely profile, I guess a judge is more likely than most.

Daniel
24-04-2009, 10:04 PM
WTF! So do you go shoplifting as well?

No, but then downloading movies/music has little risk on my part compared to shoplifting. All i'm saying is getting such things for free has, in my eyes, devalued them and highlighted the problem in how the retail price is divided. If my ISP stopped torrents and people where banged up for downloading i can't see myself going back to buying dvds and albums unless they dropped down to $5 a go.

averybluemonkey
24-04-2009, 10:38 PM
No, but then downloading movies/music has little risk on my part compared to shoplifting. All i'm saying is getting such things for free has, in my eyes, devalued them and highlighted the problem in how the retail price is divided. If my ISP stopped torrents and people where banged up for downloading i can't see myself going back to buying dvds and albums unless they dropped down to $5 a go.

That's how much many DVDs cost in the likes of Tescos, Fopp and HMV.

KIT786
25-04-2009, 08:06 PM
Slighty OT but seems there is a case about to start about DVD copying.
Its about you being able to rip a copy of a DVD you own to your hard drive so you can watch it whenever, but at the same time keeping all the disc copy protection intact so you can't just burn it to dvd to pirate.

http://www.macworld.com/article/140214/2009/04/dvdcopying.html

JP
30-06-2009, 06:55 PM
Doesn't really deserve it's own thread but The Pirate Bay has been bought by (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/8127050.stm) The Global Gaming Factory for &#163;4.7m. Their plans (http://www.globalgamingfactory.com//) are to legitimise the site so that the copyright holders get paid for things that are bought on the site.

I feel this is really good news but I can't help feel a little disappointed that the Pirate Bay founders have actually been paid for the business. I'd have been much happier if it was possible from somebody to have just downloaded it for free instead.:hmm:

Hopefully somebody will manage to steal it from them as after all, &#163;4.7m is nothing but binary data moved from computer to computer now.

PeteJ
30-06-2009, 07:10 PM
&#163;4.7m for one of the biggest websites in the world is a bit of a bargin, GGF will win big from this.

I guess this is going to be a site like we7.com ? Free (legal) streaming but with the occasional advert.

charlesr
30-06-2009, 07:12 PM
Unless they can offer me unlimited films for &#163;15/month, I'll stick with DVD rental. Surely this is the business model they need to embrace. Not sure how they intend to serve it via p2p either - p2p is no good as a long term high speed solution - it's only good for latest popular stuff.

charlesr
30-06-2009, 07:13 PM
And although the name is big, isn't the fact that it has "pirate" in the title going to be weird in the future. At least napster was a generic name.

NemesiS
30-06-2009, 07:18 PM
I love it when people discussing piracy take the moral high ground by accusing dowloaders of being nothing but outright thieves.

I'd bet my mortgage that every member on this forum has at some point copied/downloaded/borrowed (nudge nudge wink wink) cds/dvds/games etc etc etc. Anyone who says they have never ever DL'd or had a copy of a software title, a cd full of MP3's or a copy of a film etc, is the biggest bullsh*tter this side of Pluto.

I DL movies and software but it doesn't stop me going to the cinema or buying legit software. I also DL TV shows. Thats Public Domain if its been on TV so wheres the issue there???

If i have the option to freely copy it at home on broadcast tv to vhs or DVD-r then i'm sure as sh*t gonna DL it if for some reason i can't and i wanna watch it.

Dogg Thang
30-06-2009, 07:23 PM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_domain

NemesiS
30-06-2009, 08:38 PM
Thats Public Domain if its been on TV so wheres the issue there???


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_domain

I didn't mean it literally. The point i was getting at is if something is broadcast, most people have the option to copy it.

Why do electronics manufacturers sell Video recorders/DVD recorders/Digi recorders all with the punchline, never miss an episode again!!! Record it.

Surely this is illegal, lol.

Thats why i have absolutely no problem in DL'ing TV shows. Wheres the difference in copying a show to video or DL'ing it to HDD.

Thats what i meant by Public Domain. Piracy can be a grey area

Brats
30-06-2009, 08:40 PM
I'd bet my mortgage that every member on this forum has at some point copied/downloaded/borrowed (nudge nudge wink wink) cds/dvds/games etc etc etc. Anyone who says they have never ever DL'd or had a copy of a software title, a cd full of MP3's or a copy of a film etc, is the biggest bullsh*tter this side of Pluto.

Yay, another presumptive post on a pirate thread :).

With the exception of when I was under ten years old, you're wrong. I don't have any copied or borrowed stuff. What I like, I buy. And I have done for donkeys years.

As much as you might like to think we don't exist, we do.

Lebowski
30-06-2009, 10:55 PM
Yay, another presumptive post on a pirate thread :).

With the exception of when I was under ten years old, you're wrong. I don't have any copied or borrowed stuff. What I like, I buy. And I have done for donkeys years.

As much as you might like to think we don't exist, we do.

That avatar you have that's stolen from Braid THEIF!!!

averybluemonkey
01-07-2009, 12:31 AM
I love it when people discussing piracy take the moral high ground by accusing dowloaders of being nothing but outright thieves.

I'd bet my mortgage that every member on this forum has at some point copied/downloaded/borrowed (nudge nudge wink wink) cds/dvds/games etc etc etc. Anyone who says they have never ever DL'd or had a copy of a software title, a cd full of MP3's or a copy of a film etc, is the biggest bullsh*tter this side of Pluto.


Piracy = small saving to you but big cost to those you are stealing from - the producers and infrastructure supporting them.

huxley
01-07-2009, 02:49 AM
Slighty OT but seems there is a case about to start about DVD copying.
Its about you being able to rip a copy of a DVD you own to your hard drive so you can watch it whenever, but at the same time keeping all the disc copy protection intact so you can't just burn it to dvd to pirate.

http://www.macworld.com/article/140214/2009/04/dvdcopying.html

Well thats a bit daft as most people with htpcs have been backing up their movie collections for years, its not like MS have a problem with it as windows 7 (does vista media center do it as well?) shows a library view of ripped discs and plays them like the original.



Pirate bay sold eh? All the torrenters will just move onto other trackers and the company that purchased the site will lose hits and then it will fade away, big waste of money.
We need torrent sites to be a thorn in the side of media companys as it makes them look at other ways of selling and giving media to the public. Anyone noticed the ammount of digital downloads coming packed with new retail dvd / bluray discs?
Iplayer, 4OD all based on the bt tech.