Not me brother...I'm just laughing at that poor "guy standing on the corner" having to spend some of that money that he made off our work. I don't think they can possibly lose the case with current outdated law. The judge has to interpret what he has to work with. But I do think it's funny to watch them have to fork over lots of money, time, and stress.

I feel so bad for that "guy on the corner" Oh wait...he's laughing at me, and YOU and everybody else in our business. He's just innocently pointing at all of Duke Dollars entire members areas ripped for free to anybody that wants it! And oh...I just noticed. He's not just innocently pointing. He's also getting PAID to point.

lol

But you and Gideon are definitely right. And everybody with skin in the game is just a mean and bad person. I don't even know WHAT a tracker is that gideon is babbling about. I'm in the porn business. Not the "stop people from stealing my shit, even though I'm not supposed to call it stealing" business.

Damn, I wish that poor innocent "guy on the corner pointing" named TBP would stop laughing all the way to the bank. Poor guy. His time is gonna come, and his money will be cut sharply...just like has happened to all the content producers and companies distributing and paysite owners. And then he will cry just as hard as we have.

I just hope gideon has that pic of a baby crying handy to use on TBP when that day comes. :1orglaugh

FIDDY innocent TBP's standing on the corner innocently pointing at crime and getting paid to do it

Exactly, ty

Bring back Zangoo!
:disgust

:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

That's some funny shit!

this proves my theory that most content providers going after pirates dont really even know how the technology works, and thats why these arguments go down the way they do.

Any webmaster should know what a tracker is, how you going to beat your enemy when you dont know what weapons they use?

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

added: but hey arent you the guy who doesnt believe wiki is real info? lol j/k ;)

I don't think they are my enemy. And you're right, most people do not know what a tracker is. And as a webmaster for a long time...this may be yet another annoyance that I have to deal with and learn about when I have a thousand other things to deal with. :)

I understand you guys have to deal with content issues, I just have to take note that most in these threads do not really understand the technology... as you admitted.

How can you go after a tracker if you dont know what it is? one of the first things youll learn about trackers is, they dont store any data lol which makes these threads all the more hilarious

"quit stealing my content"

"where is your content, not on our server"

lol

this whole argument is over bits of data and links to said pieces, its funny when you look from afar

I've definitely understood that they weren't serving content (unlike a tube which does) We all understood the old p2p
And I've never had an issue with people sharing content. Heck, it's just human nature to share shit with your buddies. The problem happens when TBP and others are profiting off our work and not even willing to work with us. Nope, just slapping up prepaid spots that have nothing to do with the content being presented. Yeah, they are thieves. Not directly. But indirectly it's profiting off of other people's work. And not only that, but KILLING sales to the people who actually did all the work.

If sites like TBP had been a little more open for business and were affiliates and we all made money together...that would be a different situation. If they would honor the requests of the copyright owners (who bust ass to produce the stuff) whether to have it or not have it, it would be a different situation.

A lot of people have pointed out that we TGP guys were "bad guys" at first. True. But we were open for business and quickly became the marketing that sold more memberships than anything else ever has.

The torrent sites are not doing that. They just keep taking prepaid spots and pissing people off. I've said it once, and I'll say it again...they are missing out on the real money in this biz by doing that. Not that I care. Let 'em keep collecting scraps instead of sitting down at the buffet. :)

Again, I will say I totally understand your side.

I also however, totally understand that PirateBay is just links and they provide no data.

Claiming they are stealing your content is a bit of a reach once you know that all those links on their site go to zero bytes of content. Its just links... the trackers do not host or provide any data and TPB are not "stealing."

Once you understand the technology the discussion takes a different turn, because I see a bunch of people arguing about pirates linking torrents A torrent file, in and of itself is neither bad nor good.

Its similar as you mention to TGPs who use the old adage: "we are not responsible for the content we link"

same story, different content.

Wow. Just Wow.

You openly admit you don't know shit.

Like I said.


Here. I'm going to try and explain this to you in really REALLY simple terms.

TPB (The Pirate Bay). Is like the yellow pages. They make available the INFORMATION of data. Not the data itself.

Now through out the yellow pages, you have a bunch of LEGAL information transfer.

Now let's say a few people, use the yellow pages to find a gun broker, and buy a gun. They use that gun to commit murder.

Instead of going after the person who committed murder. You're bringing the case to court and trying to CHANGE THE INTERPRETATION OF LAW, TO MAKE THE YELLOW PAGES ILLEGAL FOR PROVIDING THE MEANS TO FIND THE GUN.

.....Now, I originally referred to google. This is exactly how it would effect google, or ANY website on the internet. It would literally be a break down of information and free press and freedom of speech.

Let's say there is a document with instructions on how to make a bomb. If some person used google or any other website to obtain that document. Google or the other websites would be liable for the damages caused by the bomb. It will apply to ANYTHING done illegally with data procured from an internet source. It will make that internet source liable for the crime committed.

Is this clicking yet? Now granted, these are extreme off the wall analogies. But it seems you're not grasping it any other way it's explained.

wow, just wow potter. You are so smart man! Thanks for explaining how the internet works to me. :thumbsup

Your analogy is full of shit.

And NO, it would not destroy Google. We are talking DMCA here. I don't know what the fuck you are babbling on about. Google DOES take stuff down. Is that simple enough for YOU. Smartass.

GET thousands of adult tube videos on your site! see sig.

I sure as hell don't know what the fuck you are babbling about. We ARE NOT talking about DMCA here. This court case is about whether what TPB does is illegal.

Again, DMCA is a US Copyright Law. It has nothing to do with TPB, or this Swedish case.

You must be high or something. :stoned

Then let me talk real slow for you
(how does it feel to be disrespected in a discussion smart ass?)

YOU said it would be the same as destroying GOOGLE. I said NO, it's not. Google does link to stuff but removes it with dmca. Now do you understand why it's NOT the same thing? Or am I wasting time trying to make you understand. Now go to TBP and have a good time. I'm done with you.

A better analogy would be TPB is a guy who has a building on the corner. Inside the building he has maps that lead to stolen property which he hands out for free. People come from all over to ENTER his building to receive directions to stolen property. This free service he provides is wildly popular and creates a huge traffic flow in and out of his building. He is able to capitalize on the traffic by selling other products. His business is based on his ability to create attention by offering maps to stolen property.

I like this: cyber-hippy :)

History of the internet..




all the internet is..
A server is just a pc a website is a kick ass looking desktop/GUI.. and you're just sharing files with/from it.. with a set level of rights to look at(read), edit, create, remove, send/receive files or execute applications...

How will this trial possibly change the internet and file sharing(transfer) or start to change the internet...

Sometimes the cure is worse then the cause...

:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

any problem you can buy your way out of just an expense

so they spend a little bit of their earned money on a trial.
The last time they were procecuted "attacked" they went from serving 2.5 million users to now serving 25 million.
what you have to realize that this case is giving them hundreds of millions of dollars of free publicity for their site, and for the technology of bit torrent.

every time they get dragged into court two things happen
1. new legal precedents get set that allow more bit torrent sites to exist
2. they get a shit load of free publicity.

So yes laugh at them all you want.

1. the dcma does not apply
2. which means the false take down request provisions don't apply
3. copyright holders are asking for the take down request without accpecting these provisions(benefit without the cost)
4. the pirate bay is basically saying :321GFY because the DCMA does not apply.

so if the law as changed to force you to accept take down requests without accepting the provision that protect fair use. Every incomplete, invalid , bogus, monopoly abusing take down request would have to be obeyed too.

hense google get effected by such a bogus ruling.

typed a whole bunch of shit... then said fuck it

pretty much sums it up

Pretty funny stuff. One of the main guys behind it is from hack.se. Let's see how it pans out. Curious.

Ok, since you seem to be obsessed with DMCA. A US Copyright Law, when comparing to a Swedish affair.

DMCA still does not matter in this case. As DMCA pertains to copyright infringement. TPB is not committing copyright infringement.

TPB is not committing copyright infringement.

TPB is not committing copyright infringement.

TPB is not committing copyright infringement.

TPB is not committing copyright infringement.

TPB is not committing copyright infringement.

TPB is not committing copyright infringement.

TPB is not committing copyright infringement.

TPB is not committing copyright infringement.

TPB is not committing copyright infringement.

TPB is not committing copyright infringement.

Now. Again. Has it clicked yet? Or would you like to continue on your second hand debate of the DMCA and Google?

It's not stolen property. How do you not understand this.

.. It's only "stolen" once someone downloads it and THAT PERSON then owns the "stolen" property.

THAT PERSON has then committed copyright infringement. TPB has not.

Do you get that? Does it make sense? Bueller? Bueller?

Isn't this a superb reason for the USA to just block their domain then?

If you wish to ignore the laws of a country why should you be allowed to use that country to make money, why should you be allowed to advertise US companies to US citizens and be allowed to flout the laws of a country?

And cost other companies in that country billions in lost revenue?

The problem is the law makers have still not got to grip with the Internet. They make laws that govern their citizens while allowing citizens in other countries to flout the laws and STILL PROFIT by doing so.

Why should it be "This is the Internet so I'm free to do as I wish."?

Or should it be that as they don't block US traffic, don't exclude US companies from advertising, include US citizens in their Torrent links they should comply with US law. Or get their site blocked?

It's people like TPB who will bring about draconian laws and then idiots will blame the law makers, not the law breakers.

Some of you are saying that if it is declared legal in Sweden, then it is legal worldwide. That is not true. A US Court can still interpret the law differently.

The Pirate Bay is a service provider. They have no liability. There is no equivalent of the DMCA in Sweden that requires them to take down content upon receipt of a notice. They DO mock notices that they receive, but in reading the mockery, they are not saying, "we can break the law whenever we want", they are saying "you're an idiot for sending us a notice because we aren't doing anything illegal, it might be illegal in the US, but it's not illegal in Sweden".

Users upload torrents, users download torrents. The Pirate Bay isn't involved. In the US, if your service has too much infringement, or you are aware that infringement is taking place and you can control it and you don't, then you are in trouble. But in Sweden, this is not the case.

EU directive 2000/31/EG says that he who provides an information service is not responsible for the information that is being transferred. In order to be responsible, the service provider must initiate the transfer.

The Pirate Bay does not initiate the transfer of the torrent file.

Simply the law isn't there, the prosecution didn't gather enough evidence, it's all a bunch of cry baby US companies, and the prosecutor doesn't even know how a torrent works.

The US can block the domain name if MPAA/RIAA sued The Pirate Bay in a US Court. Courts have blocked domain names before.

But The Pirate Bay has been around for many years now. The MPAA/RIAA could have done this a long time ago. They aren't interested in stopping piracy, they are just whiners, and if they run out of things to whine about, they will be in an unemployment line.

But if you run a website, you should only have to worry about the laws in YOUR country. If every country went crazy and blocked all of the websites that it felt were violating the law, there would be no internet. And if a US company wants to advertise on a website that is (potentially) violating US law, they should be free to do that. They shouldn't be responsible for the content of websites that they advertise on.

Which makes an excellent case for banning the domain from the US.

But that would be the fault of the law makers, not the people who openly flout one countries law and take money from that country.

Maybe make a law that would make advertisers partly responsible for who they advertise with. They are just as guilty as TPB. Especially if they're US companies.

of course not because there are people in the us who have a right to use the cloud as a timeshifting device
who have a legal right to part of the swarm,
and who the copyright holders refuse to fulfill that right.
So the pirate bay is servicing those people

simple rule to follow your rights end the second my begin.
i have a right to be governed by my countries laws
the people within that country have a right to all the benefits the courts have given them (timeshifting to a cloud)
you have a right to earn an exclusive right earn a profit from your content, except for fair use.

So what solution meets all those conditions, does not violate anyones rights.
Send the pirate bay a Take down request that is complient with swedish laws.
Period.



i blame the greedy, stupid copyright holders who
1. don't use the technology, and provide their customers the fair use rights granted by the courts (set up a private tracker)
2. or send take down request complient with the countries laws.

Not really, for the pirate bay to be anything like the yellow pages, the yellow pages would have to be the illegal shit pages. Believe it or not pirate/piracy means copyright infringement, TPB owners know that and are proud of helping to distribute other peoples data/content.

Napster and other filesharing services have been taken down just for listing content, they didn't share the data themselves. But they still got shutdown and other services have been shutdown for the same thing. TPB has only last this long because they are in Sweden.

Lol what? People goto the pirate bay to........ pirate! I love the whole "but there's like one legal torrent there people use!".... lol..........

many a phone book has a section for escorts. the phone book is not liable if that escort agency provides the illegal stuff (sex for money) because some people are using those escorts for the legal activity (fake date to event).
The same is true for torrents, the same swarm (cloud) is being used for the legal activity of timeshifting as for the infringing activity of copyright infringement. Only the people using the swarm to infringe are guilty of copyright infringement. TPB is very much like yellow pages in this case.


napster pointed you to the file, it directed you to a specific file, and setup the session between two individuals to trade that file. It was directly involved in the transaction that could be infringing. Which ment it had the ability to check if the action was infringing (and prevent it) and non infringing (let it go).

Torrents don't work like that, the seeder never gives you a working copy of the file, seeding can not be an infringing activity because if you tried to play the pieces i gave you it would not work. The a public tracker, only points to the seeder, and leaves the communication completely to the leacher (that why private trackers are better than public ones).


eztv.it uses the pirate bay as their tracker, they only distribute tv shows. Content that courts have ruled that people have a right to timeshift using a cloud.
so yes there are people using the pirate bay for legal purposes.

maybe they will go after all the foreign companies who use US surfers for porn money next! block them, america doesnt need sites that people dont like!

rid the US internet of all these foreign purveyors of stolen goods and filth!!!

free us mr senator free us!!!!

For every TPB that gets shut down, blocked, ddos'ed, whatever...there will be 10 sites that open and it'll be one more fucking reason for big government to get involved with the fucking internet. It's a double edged sword.

This will not go away because TPB is in court lol. Filesharing is here to stay. People will always find ways to do it. The next version of this is going to be along the demonoid lines, where it's all by invite only or like rapidshare where it's paid subscriptions.

Everyone hanging on this court case like it makes any fucking difference whatsoever should hit the beach, have a corona and relax.

And yes, I've found our content on TPB. What should I do? Tell TPB to contact every seeder and leecher and have them remove the content from their computer since that's where the actual content resides? And while I'm at it, go ahead and contact limewire, have them do the same. Then hit up torrentz, bitnova, torrentportal, etc etc etc. Oh, and then I'll hit up google and tell them to take down any pics that show up in the images search.

Good luck with all that.

Or...hmmm...maybe I'll put out a torrent featuring our content that has a bunch of upsells in it?

Nah, that makes too much sense.

Seacrest...OUT!

I already said it was an off the wall analogy.

But, you're off in your interpretation of TPB. There isn't anything illegal on the website, the website is not promoting anything illegal, none of the torrent files are illegal, there is no copyright infringement taking place, and none of the documents/files are even illegal.

It's only illegal once someone has downloaded a file, which they do not own rights to. THEN and only then, THAT person and only that person - have broken the law.

Let's say you go to TPB right now, you look up some software. Like, Adobe. That isn't illegal, it isn't piracy. It's only illegal, and only piracy if someone completes the download of the file onto their computer and do not own rights to it.

It's not really that complicated or hard to understand.

Let's say you go to the Adobe website and click on PS. You have to PAY to download it.
That's because Adobe doesn't give it away.

Now go to TPB, click on PS and you can download it for FREE. The user needed TPB to find and download the illegal copy of PS software.

While TPB may technically not be breaking any current laws it still facilitates theft.

No one said anything about giving anything away. If you have not bought rights to the software, you have no rights to own a copy.

Does that make sense? To own a copy of something, you have to own rights to it (or bought the rights). If you own a copy without rights, YOU are breaking the law.

Well sort of. If you go to TPB you can find information on a torrent. Once you have that torrent you can download the file for free. Now, if you do download it. You can complete the file on to your computer if you have rights to it. If you complete the file on to your computer and you do not have rights to it YOU are breaking the law.

Also, there really isn't such thing as an "illegal copy" as a noun at least, the term would work if you meant it as a verb. Point being a copy of data is not illegal in any sense. It's only legal or illegal for a person to OWN/USE that copy depending if they do or do not have rights to it.

They do not facilitate theft. I hope with the explanation above you can understand the technology a little better.

Most everyone on this board works in the online industry. How do you guys not understand the basics of copyright laws?

I just told you, they can block the domain name if they took it to Court. They don't want to!

Do you know how screwed up the MPAA is? They convinced a federal judge to let them seize 500,000 blank DVDs that they claim were going to be used to make pirated DVDs. But there was never any hard evidence and they never even found a single pirated copy. And then they convinced the judge to let them destroy the DVDs. They took them to the middle of a park and crushed them with a bulldozer so that people could watch. If that isn't ignorant, I don't know what is. You have 500,000 blank DVDs. At the very least you could donate them to schools or hospitals. Or you could sell them and use the money to fund your anti-piracy campaigns.

Making advertisers liable for advertising on websites that (may) infringe on copyright would be obscene and unacceptable. Especially considering that many ads come from ad agencies, and that the content of websites can change in a matter of minutes, especially with user generated content. Imagine that you are running ads on NBC during Chuck or some other show, and you do not know what is going to be in that show before it aired, and the writers of Chuck stole some stuff from Gossip Girl. Do you think that the advertiser should be liable?

The internet is already way too uptight about what we can and can't do. We need less laws, not more.

And the real problem here is that we are going after The Pirate Bay for copyright infringement that other users committed. Now the media companies can still go after individuals who downloaded their content. Do you think that it is fair that they can recover damages twice for the same act of infringement? And how are we supposed to say that The Pirate Bay is entirely liable for the infringement that took place?

The Pirate Bay hates copyright. They know that most of their users are downloading infringing materials. But you can't prove it. And you can't point to a single act of actual infringement where you can identify somebody who completely downloaded an infringing file using a Pirate Bay tracker and/or a torrent file downloaded from The Pirate Bay. And even if you could, they could still raise the argument that they weren't directly involved because they don't know the user.

Maybe Sweden will get a DMCA and then The Pirate Bay will remove torrents based on complaints. Not that it would matter, really, because (a) torrents can be re-uploaded, (b) torrents are syndicated across many other torrent sites so you can always find the torrent that you want, and (c) copyright holders are too lazy to remove torrents.

It really isn't that hard to get a torrent removed, but none of them ever do it. There are plenty of automated programs. If you are CBS and go to mininova.org and search for "How I Met Your Mother", you get thousands of torrents. You can DMCA them (they accept notices). A software program could index all of those torrents in a few minutes.

This trial is just a big pile of crap. The MPAA spent millions of dollars propping up this prosecutor in order to make an example out of The Pirate Bay. And for what?

If The Pirate Bay loses, they will say, look we made an example out of them and we are committed to stopping the spread of piracy. Then they will spend the next year whining and ignoring the actual piracy. They might pick one company to sue or something.

And if they win, the MPAA will be even happier, because they can whine about how foreign countries don't respect US copyrights and how they are losing billions of dollars overseas to some guy who taped 15 seconds of a movie on his cell phone.

http://torrentfreak.com/pirate-bay-t...idence-090224/

?So the actual downloading [of the pirated works/files] happens outside of TPB?? Carl Lundström?s lawyer asked. ?Yes,? Anders Nilsson replied.

oh my god if you hated torrents before, you are going to love them now, that the official representative of the IFPI made this admission.

now all we have to do is get them to admit that if you tried to play the file using only the pieces one seeder gave you it would not work. And torrents would a 100% legal technology.

can't wait for the shredder demo.

too many deep thinkers in this thread.

Why dont you use that energy and go make some money.

did they win? as i refuse to search google for this. i'm here not on google.

because they work in adult... everything is for free in adult and they are too lazy to learn a new business and move on...

I guess, once their bank accounts f what they made between 2002 and 2006, get empty, they will move their butts and learn a new profitabel business...

copyright laws are not simple nor are there really any "basics.

regardless of how you feel about torrent or tpb what it boils down to is the way torrents are being used right now, the vast majority is theft. They will regulate them eventually. Whenever a service skirts the law they always regulate them. "escorts" , "pawnshops"

I've always said that. If the guys with the money don't like the law.. they'll just have the law changed. :2 cents:

forgot to mention

Verdict is 4/17/2009

100% dead wrong

more than 50% of all torrent traffic is tv shows
timeshifting a tv show using a cloud is legal even in th states.
ergo a majority of torrent use is NOT theft but legally defined fair use of timeshifting.

the problem is you are trying to reclassify something that is legal as if it is illegal
that is the fundamental problem with the procecutions case in this example too.

holy shit thats crazy.