Pirate Bay file-share case starts

reply to post by N. Tesla


This may not mean much, but an avrage music cd in the uk costs around £19.99p. so mr Pirate goes out and buys 1 original music cd for each of the top 100 in the uk spends around £2000 each week or mounth, to sell this is 1 guy spending £2000, i am 1 guy and i spend around £19.99p every 4 or 5 mounths on music. this guy does it 12 times a year, and if there are 1 million people like mr pirate, then the cd makers must be making more than they would from us. but i am leaving out the real reasion they are moaning. its where the money mr pirate makes goes!.
into Crime so they tell us here in the uk. Russian Crime Lords ect.
This is the real reasion they want it to stop. or is it.............

reply to post by ImaginaryReality1984


i recall a group trying to do that from the UK
buy an island off the coast of the UK and make it so they can set up servers and so on be emune from UK laws.

While there are open source programmes etc that are free to distribute, Pirate Bay have a legitimate right to exist.

The fact that some people break the law and upload copyrighted material is hardly the fault of Pirate Bay.

Anyway i think its immoral that someone can earn more money from a song or a film than your average person can earn in a lifetime.

In my opinion music should be allowed to be downloaded freely, and artists should earn most of their money through shows and public appearances. When it comes to movies I'm all for paying 2 dollars over the internet to have 24h to watch it. Although when it comes to complex programs and applications, they shouldnt be allowed to be obtained over the internet freely, all the effort and money it takes to build a working platform is very high, so I'd love to pay for the effort, but when it comes to buying licenses the prices are unbelievable high, this should indeed change. Then I wouldn't download them.
I used Priatebay a great deal, and find it unfair how they may end at last. It may be the start of many more trails to come, even though more sites will be appearing, but they will face the same problem after a small amount of time.
What do you guys think about rapidshare? Will it be a target soon too?



[edit on 17-2-2009 by Clairaudience]

[edit on 17-2-2009 by Clairaudience]

[edit on 17-2-2009 by Clairaudience]

50% of Charges Against Pirate Bay Dropped


There has been high drama on the second day of the Pirate Bay trial. Due to serious shortcomings in the prosecution evidence, around 50% of the charges in the case are going to have to be withdrawn. The defense describes it as a ’sensation’, seeing half of the charges being dropped on the second day.

Torrent freak

Shows just how incompetent the Riaa & co are when they have to drop 50% of the charges after just one day

[edit on 17-2-2009 by solidshot]

Originally posted by ken10
While there are open source programmes etc that are free to distribute, Pirate Bay have a legitimate right to exist.

The fact that some people break the law and upload copyrighted material is hardly the fault of Pirate Bay.

I think that's all the piratebay need to argue because it is correct. What people share is not their responsibility, just like it isn't the responsibility of the gun seller if someone kills someone with the gun, same with knifes.

Hey how about i encourage some of the friends i have to sue a certain computer supply company for supplying computers to the kid who broke into their system and damaged it. Oh wait, it isn't their fault the kid used what they supplied for something illegal is it.

This whole trial should have been thrown out the instant it arrived it court. If this weren't being supported by industries with far to much power and influence then it would already have gone away.

[edit on 17-2-2009 by ImaginaryReality1984]

Originally posted by solidshot

Shows just how incompetent the Riaa & co are when they have to drop 50% of the charges after just one day

[edit on 17-2-2009 by solidshot]

Hahaha just saw this. It's not so much incompetence as it's more that they thought they could really push these charges through. Good to see the court isn't allowing the stupidist charges to stand. Shame it didn't throw them all out though.

What i am finding most interesting is that the prosecutor doesn't seem to fully understand the technology. Not being able to explain DHT? You'd have thought they'd have read up on the case being arguing it.

[edit on 17-2-2009 by ImaginaryReality1984]

whats the point?

piratebay goes down, a week later another one pops right up...the same thing with napster...how many napster clones are there now? A bunch.

It won't matter...software, music, videos, will always be pirated...one way or another.

Originally posted by AceOfAces
whats the point?

piratebay goes down, a week later another one pops right up...the same thing with napster...how many napster clones are there now? A bunch.

It won't matter...software, music, videos, will always be pirated...one way or another.

It's a stepping stone. You see once Napster went down the music industry had a case they could refer to which meant they were able to get rid of Kazaa, Imesh and other programs more easily. They're still out there those programs but they're rather poor compared to how they used to be.

Torrents are an entirely new form of downloading to the industries involved and so they are trying to get a case past that they can refer to in furture. They need this victory, really need it because if they lose then it will be very hard to shut down torrents in general and they'll be taking out appeals for years.

Of course i tend to think that corruption is going to play a part here because the music and film industries are exceedingly powerful and able to influence and pay off the right people. Of course that's not an accusation i can back up with proof and is solely my opinion.

Originally posted by BorgHoffen
This is the fraudulent problem with these cases.
They base there case on theoretical lost revenues.
Yet 90% of the stuff they say people should have paid them for, they would not have paid for legally in the first place.
Mainly due to it being sub standard, or because the people don't possess the capital and income to pay for it.
And the company has lost nothing, has had not a physical thing stolen from it.
So there case of course is complete lies.
They should have to prove the ability to pay the said lost revenue's of every single user that downloaded it.
Of course they couldn't do that.
They try and make it the same as stealing a loaf of bread, yet they don't lose a loaf of bread.
I find that a little disrespectful to genuine victims of theft.
Its a complete con job.
Why weren't they doing this 20 years ago?
When people were copying video cassettes and records and tapes?
Its because the internet offers them massive more profits from non existent customers.
And they want the non existing customers to be there customer, by FORCE!
It is greed is why they do it.

Preach on, brother Beavis