The Pirate Bay found guilty

[bascule]

http://www.thelocal.se/18908.html

They've been found guilty of being "accessories to copyright infringement." They've been sentenced to a year in jail and ordered to pay $3.56 million.

Oof :( Hopefully they can appeal.

[Voltage Spike]

Re: The Pirate Bay found guilty

They've been found guilty of being "accessories to copyright infringement." They've been sentenced to a year in jail and ordered to pay $3.56 million.

I'm not up on my Swedish copyright law (and, unlike Thorn, I'm probably not going to hit the books on this one), but common sense tells me that this isn't surprising in the slightest. I think all of us understand the technology here, but doesn't intent usually play a large part in the law? While The Pirate Bay may be merely a gigantic bulletin board for users, it seems clear (although I don't have evidence other than the name of the site) that the intention of the operators was that users post links to illegal content.

Then again, maybe they were really careful with what they did and said. The official policy is that the site prohibits illegal content, and I certainly don't believe that every site on the Internet should be compelled to police their users. How involved is Defcon when I give out the hash "7d4b5a000b96db906680b13f84acac2421889dd9" for use in a trackerless torrent (I know, I know, it's not quite that simple ... at least with BitTorrent).

I did think it was amusing how the prosecution realized that they couldn't charge the operators with "production" of copyrighted materials until after the case had started. How embarassing.

[bascule]

Re: The Pirate Bay found guilty

My problem with this is by the very nature of the BitTorrent protocol they were never in direct contact with the infringing content. They ran trackers which merely tell BitTorrent clients where peers with the infringing content are located.

How involved is Defcon when I give out the hash "7d4b5a000b96db906680b13f84acac2421889dd9" for use in a trackerless torrent (I know, I know, it's not quite that simple ... at least with BitTorrent).

And that's the same basic idea... apparently giving out the location of infringing content makes you an "accessory to copyright infringement"?

I guess it's the spirit of what they're doing... they run a web site called "The Pirate Bay" and all, so obviously infringement was their agenda. However, they're going to jail for effectively giving out links to infringing content. I don't think that's fair.

[g3k_]

Re: The Pirate Bay found guilty

I guess it's the spirit of what they're doing... they run a web site called "The Pirate Bay" and all, so obviously infringement was their agenda. However, they're going to jail for effectively giving out links to infringing content. I don't think that's fair.

I agree. Its obvious they intended what is going down, but I don't think they should be held liable. The question now is "can google be held liable for copyright infringement?" This sets a strange precedent.

Now to the appeals. They intend to appeal, but they probably won't receive any resolution on the appeals for a number of years. Here is the link to torrent freak which is a great blog for torrent users explaining some things: http://torrentfreak.com/the-pirate-b...erdict-090417/ (I believe they have direct contact with the TPB guys)

A few other interesting things are occurring now as well. IFPI is being overrun by DDoS (http://torrentfreak.com/ifpi-site-un...orters-090420/). I haven't been on /b/ or /i/ in a while, but I'm sure Anonymous is in on this as well. And second, the number or registered members of the Swedish Pirate Party have surged after the verdict was read. (http://torrentfreak.com/pirate-party...erdict-090417/)

I read something that I have to agree with (I don't remember the source) but either verdict is a victory for this movement in Sweden. If they were proven innocent, their actions are validated, if guilty, they are seen as martyrs for the cause. (explains the surge in the party membership)

[Cranial]

Re: The Pirate Bay found guilty

The question now is "can google be held liable for copyright infringement?" This sets a strange precedent.

Well by natural progression you would have to assume they are: http://www.google.com.au/search?hl=e...aq=0&oq=the+pi

They are linking to a site which has been 'proven' to supply/able the supply of copyright material.

[g3k_]

Re: The Pirate Bay found guilty

Oh. And yes. Anonymous is on the case: http://partyvan.info/wiki/Operation_Baylout

This is going to be interesting.

[edit] whatever your stance on this situation is... here is an interesting piece: http://www.techdirt.com/article.php?...&threaded=true