 jc100
join:2002-04-10
 ·RoadRunner Cable
2 edits | You're Screwed As much as I would like to say this guy has a spitting chance, he doesn't. The courts here are run by morons. Just as google and yahoo hold no liability to the content they link, so should bittorent. However, the people making these rulings are too ignorant to make such a discernible distinction and link the two together. Let's face it, these rulings might ultimately affect search engines. If I were yahoo or google, I'd be helping these guys (bittorent owners) fight the legal cases. Such laws and rulings often become slipper slopes for further action. Whats to say the AA's don't target these two entites for linking to crack or keygen sites next? Sadly, anyone (but the courts) with half a brain should be able to reason the individual should be the one liable, not the messenger. Note the emphasis on SHOULD and BRAIN. | |
|  | | | | jc100
join:2002-04-10
·RoadRunner Cable
| Re: You're Screwed Wrong super. Google / Yahoo / torrents are NO DIFFERENT. They all are just an index of what the web has to offer. You can search for cracks, keygens, etc on yahoo and google, just the same as you can on torrents. The thing that they all share, none of them directly give you access to the files. These are down via third parties. All are collection of what's out there without "giving" you it. | |
| | | | 
moron28
@comcast.net | Re: You're Screwed Providing a link to a torrent is not quite the same as hosting the actual torrent itself. While the torrent is one step removed from the actual content, the link to the torrent is 2 steps removed. | |
| | | | | 
james
join:2001-02-26
antarctica
| Re: You're Screwed Nice name.
The torrent file contains no pirated content, it just links to the person with the file, so there is a "step" you've ignored. Compare that to search engines pointing to sites that directly host mp3 files, which would also be "one step".
But really, who cares about your fancy "steps". The fact remains that torrent files contain absolutely no copywritten content, and thus the person who is violating the law would be the original seeder, and arguably anyone who doesnt disable their upload while downloading. | |
| 
KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK
·Cox HSI
 ·AT&T Southwest
| I figured as much.... You can't be found guilty of copyright infringement if you never actually infringed anything anyways.
This was basically a one sided deal. Dead and gone, no money, no money for defense, therefore no defense presented in Court, so therefore the plaintiffs basically get a default judgement which is as worthless as the paper it's written on.
--
"Regulatory capitalism is when companies invest in lawyers, lobbyists, and politicians, instead of plant, people, and customer service." - former FCC Chairman William Kennard (A real FCC Chairman, unlike the current Corporate Spokesperson in the job!) | |
| | russotto
join:2000-10-05
Collegeville, PA
| Re: I figured as much.... said by KrK  :You can't be found guilty of copyright infringement if you never actually infringed anything anyways. Unfortunately, this is not true. The courts have come up with the idea of contributory and vicarious infringement. Contributory meaning you helped someone else infringe, vicarious meaning you knowingly or through willfull ignorance benefited from someone else's infringment. Add to that the theory of induced infringement (basically like it sounds) which is not yet accepted by the courts, and you can see that you can be nailed for infringement without so much as one copyrighted bit coming under your control. | |
| | |
KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK | Re: I figured as much.... This type of legal stupidity needs to be killed now.
I mean think about it.
Think firearms. You could EASILY argue that they benefit from violent crime... etc etc
It's all nonsense. | |
| | | | 
MisterMarcus
join:2001-11-10
San Diego, CA
| Re: I figured as much.... I don't think the problem is with the law. I think it's with the application of said law.
By courts he means "civil" courts - which are inherently flawed, because it goes against the very spirit of the court system by assuming you're guilty and forcing you to prove why you're not. In the civil court, something like this automatically means you're liable, and it's not easy to prove you're not. That's the hook.
If this were to be applied as a criminal court case with financial repercussions, 7 of every 10 cases would be dismissed summarily, because the jury wouldn't allow such circular logic. There would have to be proof of a crime, not just circumstantial evidence of the intent of a crime without motive.
What the civil court says, using this law: If you (1) help someone else copy music, whether you knew you did it or not, (2) benefit from someone else's music copying whether you were aware or realized those benefits, (3) copied music whether or not you purchased it, or (4) used tools normally used for music sharing that pointed to your copied music library, regardless of whether said music was or was not legal, then you're automatically guilty.
Well hell, that logic basically paints 94% of the world as guilty, if you assume that Google Desktop or MSN Desktop Search fit under category 4 (since the searches can do web searches), that Windows Media Player fit under category 3, that borrowing a friend's computer and playing their music fit under category 2 (regardless of whether you knew their music was 'pirated'), or if the use of Tor fit under category 1 (if someone pirated through you as a relay).
Silly, isn't it? I'm sure I'm exaggerating, but that's the type of logic the civil laws allow. | |
| 
Chiyo
Save Me Konata-Chan
Premium
join:2003-02-20
Minneapolis, MN
clubs:
·Comcast
| let me get my checkbook If I ran a torrent site and had to play against the MPAA I sure as hell wouldn't pay 'em who has that kind of money laying around?
Either way can't they get an appeal for stupidity of the court? since when can a judge order you to spy on your own users for the gain of a cooperation?
--
My Blog:
»abanzai.animeblogger.net/ | |
| | 
La Luna
Surviving Ashraful
Premium
join:2001-07-12
Warwick, NY
clubs:
 ·Vonage
·Optimum Online
| Re: let me get my checkbook said by Chiyo :If I ran a torrent site and had to play against the MPAA I sure as hell wouldn't pay 'em who has that kind of money laying around? Either way can't they get an appeal for stupidity of the court? since when can a judge order you to spy on your own users for the gain of a cooperation? Didn't read the article? The MPAA won't be getting any money and the judge didn't order them to "spy on [their] users", they were ordered to turn over *documents* (what kind of documents isn't mentioned), which they refused to do.
TorrentSpy’s lawyer wants people to know that the business is bankrupt (after closing shop in March) and won’t actually be paying the fine. The reason he considers this important is he wants other businesses in this position to realize that the MPAA may flaunt this as a win but that it’s not necessarily so cut-and-dry. In addition to the fact that the MPAA won’t be getting any money from TorrentSpy, it’s notable that the fine was imposed only after TorrentSpy refused to turn over documents to the court and not as the result of what was actually found to be copyright infringement. This means that the case shouldn’t be considered precedent for other torrent sites...
--
11,053 DEADLY TERROR ATTACKS SINCE 9/11~~TEAM DISCOVERY
Can't feel you anymore, don't need you anymore, don't believe you anymore, I don't need you anymore
| |
| | |
Demonotaku2007
@comcast.net | Re: let me get my checkbook They were ordered previously to record the contents of the Memory, most likely the fine was due to them blocking all US users, and not turning the logs of the international users | |
| 
P Ness
You'Ve Forgotten 9-11 Already
Premium
join:2001-08-29
Cromwell, CT
clubs:
| Google next??? So when are they putting the billion dollar hurt on google, because i can just about find every song on either google search or video...
did not know linking to files and illegal content was illegal...i sware i see reports all the time that child porn is still easy to find on google too...but then again who wants to go after people that can actually afford a legal team?
--
www.stopfcc.comI do not think the government needs to restrict free speech especially on a device that has an off knob. | |
| | 
ztmike
Mark for moderation
Premium
join:2001-08-02
Michigan City, IN
·Comcast
1 edit | Re: Google next??? X2 Google does the same thing as these torrent sites, they BOTH link to copyright programs/movies. Google should be just as guilty as the torrent sites.
Whatever happen to that PirateBay court case? I found that pretty amusing..
--
www.youtube.com/watch?v=mdYueIC1pjM | |
| | 
MrMoody
Liberal Capitalist
join:2002-09-03
Smithfield, NC
·Skype
·magicjack.com
| said by P Ness :So when are they putting the billion dollar hurt on google, because i can just about find every song on either google search or video... did not know linking to files and illegal content was illegal...i sware i see reports all the time that child porn is still easy to find on google too...but then again who wants to go after people that can actually afford a legal team? You hit it. Google/Yahoo suits are coming, but the AAs want to get some precedent establilshed using the defenseless before they take on the deep pockets and big guns.
The days of the wild and free internet are numbered.
--
The public is a poor business manager. | |
| | | 
FiL
Premium
join:2005-08-16
Silver Spring, MD | Re: Google next??? "The days of the wild and free internet are numbered."
Bah, the internet as we know it today will survive just fine. Everyone said the same shit when Napster went belly up. Now I can DL ANYTHING I want. | |
| ja2007123
join:2007-10-06 | One more down! But the battle against piracy isn't over. I support the gov't against piracy. And no im not being sarcastic or anything. I support what is right. | |
| | RadioDoc
58ef2c0
Premium,ExMod 2000-03
join:2000-05-11 | Re: One more down! Which government would that be? These are civil cases. | |
| | | | | 
Lowtarget
Premium
join:2003-12-22
Alger, OH
clubs: | Re: One more down! The fact is MPAA will never stop torrent sites. Even if they do shut down one torrent site. Five more will spawn to take its place. | |
| | | | 
Camelot One
Premium,MVM
join:2001-11-21
Sarasota, FL
clubs:
·VoicePulse
| Re: One more down! said by Lowtarget :The fact is MPAA will never stop torrent sites. Even if they do shut down one torrent site. Five more will spawn to take its place. Which is why I am ok with them going after sites. Let them take down the ones that are so big, and so well known, that the 12 year old kid down the street knows about it.
I hate the RIAA and the MPAA, but it bugs the hell out of me when even morons can find stuff. Yeah, I'm a bit of an elitist.
--
Intel Quad Core QX6700 @3500Mhz/Asus P5N32-E SLI/4x 1024Mb Corsair/Seagate 750.10/PNY 7800GTs SLI/Silverstone 850W/Custom water cooler | |
| | | | |
FiL
Premium
join:2005-08-16
Silver Spring, MD | Re: One more down! Actually, your shooting yourself in your own foot if you think that moron 12 year old isn't helping you out. lol. The hell you think tor'z are about? The more, the better. | |
| | | | | |
Camelot One
Premium,MVM
join:2001-11-21
Sarasota, FL
clubs:
·VoicePulse
| Re: One more down! Napster was great, until the general public discovered it. Same for IRC. And now for torrents. I can do without the 12 year old's bandwidth if it means getting the item without the attention of the MPAA/RIAA.
--
Intel Quad Core QX6700 @3500Mhz/Asus P5N32-E SLI/4x 1024Mb Corsair/Seagate 750.10/PNY 7800GTs SLI/Silverstone 850W/Custom water cooler | |
| | markopoleo
join:2003-04-02
Bonne Terre, MO
·Charter Pipeline
| said by ja2007123 :But the battle against piracy isn't over. I support the gov't against piracy. And no im not being sarcastic or anything. I support what is right. If you support what is RIGHT then you would not support the government vs piracy..
By supporting them you are saying you support a broken system that has no clear cut law for each case, you also support prosecuting people based on no actual evidence other than the fact they "might of" pirated a song (prosecute someone without a computer for downloading songs for example), etc. | |
| old dude
join:2004-09-02 | Hmmmm.... It seems we have the finest judicial system money can buy.
Wait. That doesn't sound quite right. | |
| qworster
join:2001-11-25
Los Angeles, CA
·Brand X Internet
·RoadRunner Cable
·Vonage
·DSL EXTREME
4 edits | It's all about graft This country runs on graft and payoffs. Every Govt. official has their hand out for graft, the record and movie and broadcast industry supply graft and they get whatever laws they want passed. The courts are full of judges who are tecnophobic morons that still read newspapers for their information. If I showed them an AAA battery and said: "This promotes infringement" (with a suitable graft payoff) they'd probably outlaw AAA batteries!
Patent and copyright laws are running amok, fair use is in the toilet, what's next? TV sets with credit card slots on them?
None of this is about 'protecting' anything but a few industries that refuse to change their way of doing business. Does anyone realize that Napster is almost TEN YEARS OLD? These industries have had TEN YEARS to come up with a new business model and their response is to sue everyone in sight that tries to make them change! If they had their way there would BE no Internet!
Finally, think about how much technology has changed in the past 10 years. Ten years ago, we had Windows 95 running on 486 computers with 24 megs of RAM and 2 gig drives. Everyone used dial up connections-with 28.8 kbps if you were lucky! AOL was bigger then the Internet. Look where we are now-and how far we've come. NOW look at the movie and record industries-who still want us to come to THEM and pay inflated prices to see a movie ONCE or to pay inflated prices for a big, stupid moving disk that holds 14 songs!
Should I have to mention that those stupid CDs played just fine on that ten year old computer-or for that matter the Windows 3.1 computer before them?
They have found their allies in the elected officials who LOVE having their palms greased! It's a lot cheaper to throw 100 grand to a few corrupt pols and judges then to re-do your business model.
Of course, ten years ago, no one had heard of HDTV or IPod or MP3 or Satellite Radio or online radio or DSL or broadband or wifi or DVD or Myspace or Google or, or, or....
And if you could afford a cell phone then it was the size of a lunch box and full of static during the call...
These are all things that have happened while the RIAA and MPAA just sat there on their ever widening A$$e$-paying off anyone that could help them keep their 'buggy whip' like business model!
Has it occurred to anyone that while the RIAA, MPAA. US politicians and courts continue fighting to keep us back in the mid 1980s media/technology wise, that the rest of the world is passing us by? We're more and more losing our technological 'edge' and instead becoming more and more irrelevant?
These are the typical reactions of American companies these days: SHORT TERM GAINS and LONG TERM LOSSES!
The problem is that we CAN'T do this any more. We're already treading water as it is....soon we'll be drowning!
Come to think of it, it's too bad for AOL that they never considered graft. If they had just bribed a few judges and pols, there'd likely BE no USA Internet and we'd all still be dialing into our local AOL portal for everything. Too bad, AOL! | |
| | | | |
FiL
Premium
join:2005-08-16
Silver Spring, MD | Re: It's all about graft I'm in agreement with most of what you said, except for the health concerns.
... and for that part of my disagreement, all I have to say is McNugget's, anyone? | |
| | | | 
Xizer
join:2004-02-05
New York, NY | Re: It's all about graft Yeah, let's outlaw McDonald's from operating because a few fatasses with no self control eat there every day.
I eat at McDonald's an average of once every two weeks, and I am not obese nor in poor health. | |
| | | 
a333
A hot cup of integrals please
join:2007-06-12
Corona, NY | Lol, the PirateBay isn't ONLY in Sweden either. To shut them down COMPLETELY would require the **AA's to sue across continents, and bribe quite a few governments overseas. As if the Swedes weren't hard enough............ | |
| | | | |
FiL
Premium
join:2005-08-16
Silver Spring, MD
| Re: It's all about graft Blanket statement. I don't want DRM audio files. Why do I need to pay a premium for non-DRM music?
Why is it ok for businesses to create problems, then charge premiums to eleviate said problems?
And what are we stealing? The details matter a lot when it comes to discussing copyrights. How have I stolen anything if its being given to me freely, over the air? I DL a show aired to me for free, and keep it for my own viewing pleasure, an that is stealing? What law have I broken.
In conclusion, down with the **AA's! | |
| | | | EPS
join:2008-02-13
Hingham, MA
| Video game companies You know, the video game companies don't seem to have to spend nearly as much effort fighting piracy- and piracy is rampant there. (Much more on older systems, but that cuts into the companies, especially Nintendo, efforts to sell older games as "remakes")
Of course, if every few years the music companies got to release a new type of music player and music could only be played on that form without full emulation software, maybe they wouldn't be complaining too. | |
| 
norky
Premium
join:2002-12-02
Lithia, FL | filetype: Google has the ability to search for only torrents via filetype:torrent they really arent that far off from a site like torrentspy. | |
| |
AnonymousChris
@shawcable.net
| Re: filetype: The above posters' points were that google doesn't host torrents. Of course, the ones who replied to that were completely correct when they said that a .torrent file contains nothing but a map of where a specific file can be found.
Although really, most of the things that can be found through a torrent can be found direct download more often then not, using Google, making Google the same as a .torrent. Just points in the direction of the file rather then containing (or hosting) the file.
The reason why torrent sites get shutdown and Google doesn't is because torrents can't be shutdown. The "host" is every computer in the swarm (assuming they have uploading enabled). It's decentralized, and companies like the **AA's can't deal with decentralized. They need something to attack, like a website, or a network (Napster).
Torrents pose a far greater threat to them, and their unchanging business model, then Google linking to a direct download. The site hosting it could just be taken down right? | |
| | |
a333
A hot cup of integrals please
join:2007-06-12
Corona, NY
·Verizon Online DSL
| Re: Next thing you know is that Microsoft will charge you a premium every year to let you run Windoze on your computer.
Let's face it, "piracy" is everywhere!! Heck, I can walk into my local Starbucks or McDonald's and listen to DRM-protected music being blasted out loud on their speakers!! What's next, mandatory headphones that filter DRM content, with a WiFi connection and a credit card slot, to 'unlock' them? Geez...
Expect TK Junk Mail to explain it to you in 5......4.......3........2........1....... seconds/posts/whichever comes first..... | |
| DrData
Premium
join:2004-12-31
Apopka, FL
·Embarq
| TorrentSpy I’m not a lawyer, but I believe its called facilitation.
The difference between goggle and yahoo is they will remove illegal content when made aware of it and help in resolving infringements, torrents sites laugh at complaints.
To be a safe harbor you have to take action on complaints or be held liable, something which torrents sites do not and why they're ultimately held liable.
This is my understanding anyway. | |
| |
RoyalWitCheese
@shawcable.net
| Re: TorrentSpy Google will remove illegal content from YouTube. This is because the Illegal content is physically located on their computers. (users upload content to their servers) So yes, when notified that there is illegal content on their computers they will do the legal thing and remove the illegal files.
Their search site has NO illegal content. Links to illegal content - Yes, but since they're only pointing to it, they're not responsible with what you do with that information. The information they give you is just that, Information. Giving information about illegal activities is not a crime.
As such, Torrent search sites such as PirateBay, fall under the same blanket. They're only supplying information, the information comes in the form of a file. A Google search also supplies you information as a file (.html)
What the individual does with that information is where the legal decision is made. | |
| davidbrown
join:2005-05-31
Toronto, ON
·Bell Sympatico
| They stand no chance I think some here are really missing the point.
Wither or not it breaks the law doesn't matter.
If they want it they are going to get it for no better reason is they have all the power and money behind them.
Every signal company has lost in the end and isohunt is not going to fair any better.
The crazy thing about this is nothing they do is going to matter since bitorents and the like is here to stay. | |
| | | |
|
|
TorrentSpy Isn't Paying $100 Million Court-Ordered Fine
