Pirate Bay beached but not sunk
From Hollywood to Stockholm via London, the movie and music industries will be breathing a sigh of relief, albeit one which will only last a short while.
The Pirate Bay has been, as far as the professional creative industries are concerned, public enemy number one in the battle against the file-sharing of content without permission.
For years, The Pirate Bay has not just ignored the requests and ultimately legal demands of the International Federation of the Phonographic Industries and the Motion Picture Association of America, it has publicly and volubly taunted them, even daring them to try and sue it in the Swedish courts.
The IFPI and MPAA had to take action against The Pirate Bay because to do nothing would have meant sitting on their hands.
Certainly, the conviction of The Pirate Bay founders is the biggest scalp since Napster was brought to heel in July 2001.
Eight years ago Napster was successfully pursued and shut down but it is very unlikely that the same thing will happen to The Pirate Bay.
It is almost certain that The Pirate Bay will keep on sailing, long after today's court judgement.
The fact The Pirate Bay's servers are outside Sweden and the fact it has enough support to keep it afloat financially will ensure it remains one of the most popular sources of copyright material on the internet.
And given that The Pirate Bay's founders will appeal, the authorities in Sweden have no power to force the four men to switch off the power at the data centre.
But the IFPI and the MPAA know this only too well. The goal has never been the closure of The Pirate Bay, although I doubt they would say this publicly.
This was always about awareness and education.
Eight years ago Napster was one of only a handful of similar file-sharing technologies. The mistaken aim then was to try and cut people off at the source - and the source was the file-sharing technology.
The rise of BitTorrent and the plethora of clients and torrent trackers that make finding content simple has made that approach futile.
The professional creative industries know too well that file-sharing copyright files without permission is not something they will ever completely eradicate.
Instead, they want to drive it to the margins of society - and to do that they have to educate the file-sharers and attempt to eradicate the abuse of file-sharing technologies.
But the battle is a long, long way from success. Unauthorised file-sharing is many factors more popular now than it was in the days of Napster, fuelled by the ubiquity of broadband connections.
According to the IFPI, tens of billions of illegal files were swapped in 2007. The ratio of unlicensed tracks downloaded to legal tracks sold is about 20 to one.
There is a 'lost generation' of music listeners who probably will never be pulled back from using illegal file-sharing networks.
These are the people caught in the gap between the old model of physical disc sales and the new emerging models of streaming music (Spotify), subscription music (Comes with Music) and legal downloads (iTunes).
It is the heart and minds of those music listeners and film watchers born into the iPod generation that the music and film industries are targeting.
Victory over The Pirate Bay may not have meant its sinking, but it's a shot across the bows of those who are still using illegal file-sharing sites and, more importantly, those thinking of using such sites.
The battle is already shifting away from The Pirate Bay and towards those gatekeepers of the web, the Internet Service Providers.
The creative industries want ISPs to become the guardian of those gateways and take more responsibility over the way their customers use the internet.
© MMIX~RS~q~RS~~RS~z~RS~03~RS~)
Comments
Sign in or register to comment.
One thing strikes me here - if the Pirate Bay has been found guilty of copyright infringement just for allowing third parties to use their servers to swap media, why are the IFPI and MPAA not going after the software makers such as BitTorrent? After all, if it wasn't for Torrent software, Pirate Bay wouldn't even exist?
Complain about this comment
'P2P is a demand signal form the market,' Cory Doctorow.
Complain about this comment
I simply can't understand the ruling, given that the Pirate Bay is essentially a search engine.
If the Pirate Bay is guilty then so are companies like google and yahoo! as they too link to copyrighted material.
I'd like to see the IFPI and MPAA try to take the likes of google to court!
Complain about this comment
If media firms actually gave consumers what they wanted, at a reasonable price and in a versatile format that consumers could use where they wanted then Pirate Bay would not exist.
It is wrong to download copyrighted material without permission or license, but if people use the Pirate Bay to download the latest episode of Heroes before it goes out week(s) later on BBC and watch it on their mobile phone on the way into work, then is that wrong? They've already paid the license fee..!
Complain about this comment
The use of torrent sites like PB is now headline news thanks to this case. I foresee a massive increase in their use.
The point that the majority of users were never going to buy the songs/films/software seems to be missing.
The only losers are the major phonographic companies who ripped us off for years with the price of CD's and made sure the actual composers/artists hardly got any of it anyway. Historically even Elton John, Gilbert O'Sullivan et al were victims of unfair recording and copyright contracts.
Reaping and sowing springs to mind.
Complain about this comment
A sad day for Pirate Bay.
But, on the flip side, this will not halt file sharing at all. There are too many torrent hosting sites out there and the pirate bay people will be back.
Viva la revolution!
Complain about this comment
yazbod wrote:"...why are the IFPI and MPAA not going after the software makers such as BitTorrent? After all, if it wasn't for Torrent software, Pirate Bay wouldn't even exist?"
BitTorrent is a technology used for efficient downloading of a lot of legally available stuff, e.g. linux distributions which are usually large downloads.
Yazbod, you seem not to understand the difference between a technology and its use.
Since a telephone can be used to scam or threaten and a cars used to run after a robbery - should legal action be brought against phone, communications companies and car manufacturers ?
Complain about this comment
If the Industry stopped seeling DRM crippled media i might consider buying it. I have 2 kids under the age of 4, you should see what they do to a game or film DVD if they get their mitts on it. I am not adverse to paying for stuff if its delivered in a good media form and without crippling limitations. I buy my computer games on steam, I can install them on as many PC's as I like and I can re-download them from the Steam servers whenever I like, that is the future, not the sort of drm riddled one dl stuff I-tunes was peddling for years.
Complain about this comment
@yazbod
Knives are used to commit crimes every day - yet nobody is looking to outlaw your cutlery.
Just because something CAN be used for an illegal purpose does not imply that it CANNOT be used for a legal one.
BitTorrent (the technology) is used daily in a completely legal manner. The world-of-warcraft game updater uses bittorrent to download it's updates for example.
Complain about this comment
@yazbod
Why go after the software makers? Bit Torrent is a very efficent way to distribute files to multiple people/machines. I think all the legitimate users of Bit Torrent techology would have something to say about it, like Blizzard who use it to distribute patches for World Of Warcraft.
Your idea is akin to banning all knives as they could be used to stab people.
Complain about this comment
This would be like back when the home video recorder first came out, going after SONY for giving people the technology, or going after Maxel for making the tapes. All Pirate Bay is is a signpost to the software that allows the download.
Or another analogy id like going after the post office and the manufacturers of envelopes to stop people posting copyrighted material in the post.
I hope the Pirate Bay folks win their appeal.
Complain about this comment
I just had this idea of copying music on to bits of plastic and selling them in local stores and by mail order. Does anyone think it might catch on?
Complain about this comment
Even if the **AA are able to shut down TPB, which I doubt, dozens more like it will spring up in its place. People will always be able to share files, and the only way to stop them would be to switch the internet off.
If the recording industry wants to survive it has to find a new business model where using its products is more appealing to users than piracy. If they continue trying to tackle piracy through litigation, not competition, they will continue to lose.
Complain about this comment
"These are the people caught in the gap between the old model of physical disc sales and the new emerging models of streaming music (Spotify), subscription music (Comes with Music) and legal downloads (iTunes)."
Just last night I was trying to find a simple, legal music download site to replace Gnutella/Limewire (which is filled with fakes nowadays). 11 years after Napster I still can't find one that fulfils the simple features that all 'illegal' file-sharing networks have:
* Unlimited selection & available everywhere - not just the USA or something stupid like that
* No DRM and widely compatible formats like MP3
* An actual download - not a subscription service which can't be used on an MP3 player or will be useless when the company goes out of business
* Reasonably priced
Until such a thing exists (for movies and TV shows too) long live Pirate Bay!
Complain about this comment
didge9293 wrote:
"The only losers are the major phonographic companies who ripped us off for years with the price of CD's and made sure the actual composers/artists hardly got any of it anyway. Historically even Elton John, Gilbert O'Sullivan et al were victims of unfair recording and copyright contracts."
But how do these artists benefit in any way from their material being downloaded for free? To me, 'file sharing' just seems to be a nice way of saying 'passing round stolen goods'.
Complain about this comment
> 'The creative industries want ISPs to become the guardian of those gateways and take more responsibility over the way their customers use the internet.'
I think this is a particularly dangerous development in this battle between copyright holders and consumers.
Could you imagine the outcry if the government announced 'We're going to open every letter & parcel delivered by the Post Office to check it's not infringing copyright'? Outrageous!
Yet copyright holders are asking for analagous powers over the internet - they shouldn't have it, shouldn't get it and will just hasten everyone to move to encryption, with, once again, consumers staying ahead of the film & music industry.
I regularly use Pirate Bay but purposely avoid any copyright material and stick to the legal stuff. I'll be disappointed if it gets shut down.
If the creative industries want to stay creative, it's their business models they should be creative about...
Complain about this comment
It says everything about the naiveity of the a IFPI & MPAA that they knew the website wouldn't be shutdown and that they just wanted this case to make headlines.
If anything since this case has been in the press I've had more and more people asking me how to use bittorrent. This will backfire massively, imo it already has, and any ISP that tries to stop their customers using P2P will quickly find themselves out of business.
Why promote the fact you have 'superfast' broadband when most people outside of the filesharing community don't need it?
Complain about this comment
Time to prosecute Google then.
Complain about this comment
@yazbod:
The use of BitTorrent is not illegal due to the fact it is an easy way to share files over the internet, for instance many linux distributions use this method to provide their software and cd images. What has happened is that illegal filesharing has picked up on the efficiency of BitTorrent and now uses it as their main method of distributing illegal material over the internet. So while BitTorrent is mainly used as a medium for distributing copyrighted material the software at the base of it is not illegalin in any way shape or form and therefor cannot be shut down by law in any country.
Complain about this comment
I reckon the guys who've been sent to prison are now folk heroes like the guy who threw his shoe at President Bush. As perceived victims of the system, their incarceration will only encourage more anti-establishment feeling and the publicity will ensure that file sharing becomes even more popular.
Why don't the music industry enforcers try take back some of the excessive wealth accumulated by successful pop stars and redistribute it to talented musicians, etc. who need the cash. then the rest of us could enjoy the music which doesn't cost them a penny for us to listen to?
Complain about this comment
"One thing strikes me here - if the Pirate Bay has been found guilty of copyright infringement just for allowing third parties to use their servers to swap media, why are the IFPI and MPAA not going after the software makers such as BitTorrent? After all, if it wasn't for Torrent software, Pirate Bay wouldn't even exist?"
That's because you could legitimately say that BitTorrent could be used to distribute other file types, such as pictures or documents, that might NOT be subject to copyright.
Complain about this comment
yazbod, you ask "why are the IFPI and MPAA not going after the software makers such as BitTorrent?"
You cannot prosecute the maker of a technology just because you feel that someone is abusing it. This would be like "going after" Woolworths because they sold a kitchen knife used in a murder.
torrent technology is elegant and efficient. Just yesterday a piece of commercial software I own performed an update with its own torrent module.
People seem to be missing the point about this case;
1. The software in itself is not, and can not, be illegal.
2. The Pirate Bay is a search engine just like Google et al. As many have said here and elsewhere - the hypocrisy desplayed here is unlikely to create any respect for the IFPI and MPAA.
3. @rajesh_j - indeed, a least some of the drive for cracked software/DRM free content is that the industry(ies) impose restrictions on products that you PAY for, that do not exist on the cracked versions.
You get an inferior product if you pay for it!
I don't agree with piracy but the entertainment bodies need to wise up. People aren't idiots.
Complain about this comment
I haven't bought any music in years. It just seems ethically wrong when the money I pay is used to fund court cases such as this one.
It is a great shame for the artists but the current model doesn't work.
With this verdict I think I am going to have to think about extending my boycott. No more Sony electronics or Warner Bros films etc for me.
Complain about this comment
The verdict is irrelevant - it will be appealed, a judge with a better understanding of the technology will reverse the decision and the Pirate Bay will stick around. Even if an appeal is unsuccessful PB will stick around.
If John Kennedy of the IFPI thinks this sends out a "clear message" he's very much mistaken, all it has done is brought torrents and similar technology to those who had previously never heard of them. If anything this will see an increase in piracy, not a decrease.
The recording industry is better off learning to work with piracy by changing their own marketing tactics (by using cheap mp3 downloads, reducing the cost of (overpriced) CDs and, perhaps, getting some better music!) rather than trying to stop piracy outright, which is just not going to happen. They are naive if they think this verdict changes anything in their favour.
Complain about this comment
This court case was never about the law, this court case was about setting an example.
The IFPI and MPAA have shot themselves in the foot, if they honestly beleive that this will stop the file sharing scene then there mistaken. This will only create a bigger market due to the media coverage of the case.
I don't see anybody taking Youtube to court over their content, which is stored on their servers.
Case in point, I am sure your aware of the recent media frenzy over Susan Boyle the Britains got Talent contestant, whose video has been watched over 11 million times.
These posted video clips in any format are copyright material recorded off-air and posted by various patrons of Youtube. Surely now everybody whose posted/watched it is guilty of copyright theft.
Now that we have court ruling, there can be no distinction between file-sharing, content sharing and social-networking sites.
By definition we are all guilty.
Complain about this comment
Interesting verdict - now I wonder when the manufacturers of ladders, or cars or knives or anything else that can be used in crime will be appearing in court.
Not all torrents are illegal! I use them all the time for Linux distros and other such things.
The fact the music companies are saying this is lost revenue can not be based on fact - afterall, I am sure that the majority of people who downloaded the content would not have bought it if it were not available freely. Look at anyone's MP3 collection, there would be about £20,000's worth of music in there, who really apart from the uber-wealthy could afford a collection this big if it were not for sites like TPB?
Complain about this comment
In answer to comment #1.
Bittorrent is just a tool, it can and is being used for legitimate file sharing.
Also, Bittorrent is far from being the only source of illegal content, it's just the most popular and high profile at this time.
Complain about this comment
Forget torrent sites like TPB, they are only a signpost to the actual pirated files. There is no content on their servers. This case just shows how hopelessly out of touch with technology the media companies have become. They still think this is about copyright when it's really about their business model.
Even if this silly verdict stands the industry hasn't changed anything, just use "artistname filetype:torrent" in Google and you'll see.
Complain about this comment
This looks to me like a pyrrhic victory for the IFPI. As has already been pointed out, it isn't going to do anything to actually shut down TPB, and the users aren't going to stop using it. Assuming that the various appeals fail, the four defendants are going to have to serve some jail time and pay the damages, which will obviously hurt to a degree. But the headline sentence is likely to be far more than they'll actually spend inside, assuming normal remission and parole, etc, while the damages are, if the allegations of earnings are true, easily affordable. Plus, they'll have the kudos of being digital martyrs. Despite the press releases which attempt to put a positive spin on it, I don't think the IFPI and their backers are going to be over happy with this in private.
Complain about this comment
It's interesting that the record industry has gone for pirate bay but the football industry isn't going after the popular sites that stream subscription only matches such as justin.tv and ustream.com. They're just the same as piratebay, they provide links to the media content, not the content itself.
Complain about this comment
Type the name of any current/popular album into Google suggest, then press space, and I bet you will see the a torrent search in the list of suggestions. It seems even major search engines aid those looking to get illegally shared files!
Closing one site wont stop file sharing unfortunately.
Complain about this comment
This will just have a backlash on the these corporate walking greedy machines.
I for one have no problem supporting the bands I like, and I believe most people who download still buy music.
The only problem these huge companies have is that the Internet has given artists a platform to do it all by themselves, virtually not needing middle-people to sell/promote their music.
LIVE WITH IT.
Or should I remove all the REC buttons off my remote controls too?
Complain about this comment
Very strange considering they only link to downloads, and do not provide the matrial themselves. Is google therefore responsible too for all the child porn on the internet?
Complain about this comment
It's difficult to come out with an appropriate Simile because there are problems with most of the ones people are stating. How about:
This is a lot like taking the Yellow Pages to Court because a crooked tradesman is stealing revenue from the legitimate ones. By advertising on their behalf the Yellow Pages has in fact facilitated any wrongdoing done henceforth by the tradesman but also guilty of stealing from the legitimate tradesman who lost business to him to start with.
The Yellow Pages did all they could in this scenario and that's the same for TBP.
Complain about this comment
Unfortunately this result was inevitable. The industries involved have so much influence any other decision would have been nothing short of a miracle.
This should be a serious wake up call for the IFPI and MPAA. I don't doubt a large proportion of their markets will be put off by their tactics in this case. Hiring hackers to infiltrate TPB servers to gain access to their email. Sounds like criminal activity to me...
As mentioned above, this is a new age which they have completely failed to embrace, I hope they pay the ultimate price.
Complain about this comment
The court case against Alan Ellis (who ran the Oink site) has been constantly adjourned since his arrest. I wonder if the police have been rescheduling it to wait for the Pirate Bay decision, because now at least they have a case to base their arguments on?
Complain about this comment
I agree with the comment that if Pirate Bay are jailed then so should be Google and the other search engines - which is obviously not going to happen.
I've used torrents to download old TV programmes that aren't available in the shops, but I think it's wrong to download copyrighted music and films.
I used to buy a lot of CDs and DVDs but I've stopped because I'm totally alienated by the recording industry's greed, intransigence, heavy-handed tactics and failure to adapt to a changing world.
I hope the Pirate Bay people appeal successfully.
Complain about this comment
@happyskeptic2
Have you tried Amazon? They offer downloads of mp3s in the UK and the selection isn't bad either.
Complain about this comment
No copyrighted information was held by The Pirate Bay...should we now expect B&Q to be prosecuted because they sell fertilizer which CAN be used to make bombs?
Complain about this comment
I'm a bit shocked, I was genuinely hoping this verdict would be the start of a new era. new business models and the start of a new economy. Instead we have a sickenly predictable retrograde step. The earth is flat, nothing has changed since the Beatles were selling vinyl 7" singles in the 1970s. Sickenly predictable as all the judges have done is followed the whims of money, big business wanting to protect their position, tradition and old practice.
I'm considering my reaction. I have bought records for many years keen to support my favourite artists but I think I'll vow to never buy another record again, or at least not from any company that has any connection whatsoever to this legal action. I will also go to the pirate bay website today to see if I can make a donation.
What next, Microsoft trying to put linux developers in jail?
Please BBC, realise the importance of this issue and give some helpful coverage.
Complain about this comment
The problem that this court verdict gives is that they are guilty by just indexing links to the torrent files. This would mean websites like google are just as guilty in this case given I can type in any major form of media plus the word torrent and find illegal material.
Of course, we cant expect them to go after google can we? What with million of dollars available for a legal team compared to what the pirate bay had.
Complain about this comment
An inaccuracy in the blog post. TPB is NOT a "popular source[s] of copyright material " as it does not contain any copyrighted material.
As others have said, the IFPI, MPAA et. al. need to rethink their business model. Remember "home taping is killing music"?
We CDs first came out, more disposable income went in music purchases. Now, they have to compete with online gaming and mobile phone compaines.
Complain about this comment
The bottom line they are happy to make lots of money on the back of other people`s hard work and creativity. It`s called theft, and deserve to go to prison.
I see they sell nice merchandise to make even more money, how would they react to me setting up a website that links into counterfeit Pirate Bay shops that sell their T-Shirts for little price, and they miss out on royalties. I could nice little mugs, T-Shirts and Mouse mats all with the Pirate Bay Logo on, do you think they`d like that ?
I don`t think so. So stop defending them.
Complain about this comment
@happyskeptic2
You can buy DRM-free mp3s from Amazon and Play.com and they both have quite a good selection.
Complain about this comment
Has it ever crossed the industries mind that most of those who download from Pirate Bay and other sources wouldn't actually buy the music/film/software anyway?
So they aren't actually losing out on the precious money as it would never be spent in the first place.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
The illegality of downloading/stealing someones work is clear. However, there is also the diguised robbery by the record industry itself that still stays legal. An eager fan rushes out to buy or sits, pays and downloads the latest music from their heroes. Everyone is happy, then 9 months later out comes an extended version.... the downloaders have to pay for the extra tracks, the CD buyer needs to rebuy the whole thing. Who are the thieves now?
I dont mind buying a remastered version with 40 page notes that comes out once an album is a classic. But the 'filler' releases are as exploitive as 'Pirate Bay' are criminals.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Well one thing is certain.
If people didn't know about TPB before now... they do now its all over the media! and we all know TPB won't be shut down for long if someone tries to pull the plug.
It's amazing to know that even a search engine isn't safe to run. No doubt companies will start cases around the world on the basis of this news and I have a feeling that they'll be the ones that become worse off.
Maybe we should all boycott legal broadcasts and films from the companies involved and then all go and illegally download it? Can't send much more of a stronger message than that.
Right people time to start emailing the companies and suggesting that they start to attack Google and Yahoo for indexing their copyrighted material on the many millions of websites on the internet.
Lets just hope the BBC doesn't cave into requests for all our personal details on this blog to hunt us down and prosecute us for having an opinion... Where does it stop?
Complain about this comment
It is too late, pandoras box has been opened. People will always trade music digitally for free even if it is illegal.
It seems to me that the prosecutions always come to a technology that is dead or at least past it's peak usage. Napster and it's successors like Limewire and Emule were dying technology replaced by torrents. Torrents are now dying technology with newsgroups being the current place to grab files.
I suppose newsgroups will be the next target but the big problem there is the servers are owned by the ISP's and the ISP's know that good newsgoup access is getting them new customers right now. Virgin media increased their file retention rate recently and BT actually give you access to GIGANEWS.
Even with the internet was swtiched off large hard drives are so cheap you can swap huge collections with people even those abroad this way. You can hold 140k Albums on a 1TB drive that you can pick up for £100, i think that pretty much sums it up.
Complain about this comment
Poor show on behalf of our legal systems. Punishing TPB is stupid.
The powers that be seek to make an example of Pirates, but targeting TPB is stupid, it won't change anything!
Prosecuting The Pirate Bay is like Prosecuting Google for allowing us to search for links to buy illegal stuff.
TPB don't host illegal material, the effectively made a big board for people to post links on. Peer To Peer is built on the idea that we share data between people, meaning that TPB never hosted anything, the people being prosecuted should be those who share it, surely?
Complain about this comment
28 certainly makes a point of which I wasn't properly aware. I just typed "Eminem torrent" into Google and was offered page upon page of pirate sites. Piratebay was there but was well down the list.
Think again music industry. You've had it too easy for too long.
Complain about this comment
Does this mean Google will be taken to court? I use that way more than I ever used ThePirateBay to download, Google is the ultimate download website if you know how to use it and it isn't difficult.
But wait - Google will be able to afford a huge legal team, so probably not.
These idiots suing the Pirate Bay deserve to have their internet cut off.
Complain about this comment
Strikes me as a massive own goal for the recording industry. As pointed out by others above, this has created huge publicity for Pirate Bay, which is not exactly going to reduce the amount of illegal downloads.
But more importantly, these kind of strong-arm tactics make the record industry look like the Bad Guys, and the Pirate Bay folks like modern day Robin Hoods.
One day, the record industry will wake up to the idea that the internet has been invented, and will try to work with the internet rather than against it to create a new business model. Until they do, they are going to see illegal file sharing increasing exponentially.
Speaking for myself, I would say 99% of my media collection was bought legally and about 1% illegally downloaded. This story doesn't make me want to adjust that proportion in favour of the legal stuff.
Complain about this comment
I've used TPB to replace long gone vinyl that I bought (in many cases more than once) legally.
I'd never heard of torrents, The Pirate Bay or peer to peer until the story about TPB hit the press.
The phrase "shooting yourself in the foot" comes to mind.
Complain about this comment
It seems to me piracy should be made legal because it increase total welfare, ie) consumers can enjoy more software/music/films without any cost to either them or the producers of the content. Isn't it better for everyone for 10 people to enjoy the material (5 legally and 5 illegally) than just 5 legal people when the total money of the consumers and producers combined is the same. Because many people wouldn't be willing to pay for the content .
Also piracy isn't like stealing because no one loses out-if you were to copy a film the person you copy it from can still enjoy their copy whilst you enjoy yours. The only people who lose out are the rich multinationals - piracy is a form of redistribution of income.
Complain about this comment
Under this ruling would a car boot sale owner now be found guilty if pirate dvds are sold in his field ?
Complain about this comment
@dsroberts:
You're dead wrong. There is no theft involved on the Pirate Bay's part. As has been stated many, many times they only provide links to material, they do not have any of the files themselves. They are not in possession of any copyrighted material nor have they ever 'handled' any stolen copyrighted material. It's akin to you accusing me of theft because I know there's a warehouse round the corner for you to rob.
Think of them as a specialised search engine.
Complain about this comment
Three things. Firstly, if the music and film industries didn't rip people off with exorbitant prices, and the highly dubious practice of DVD 'regions' to avoid people getting stuff 'early' or 'cheaply' people wouldn't be so eager to download it illegally.
Secondly, Pirate Bay only provide access to the content, legal or not legal, and don't host any of it, so the ruling seems to be one just to keep the industry happy. Surely the issue is with the makers of PTP software?
Thirdly, if TPB by giving access to this material are guilty of inciting people into copyright infringement, then every car manufacturer that builds cars must be guilty of inciting people to break the speed limit.
Complain about this comment
TPB should counter sue the Music industry for selling over priced records, tapes and cd's in the 70's, 80's, 90's and 00's. The public has been ripped off for 40 years.
What i can't understand is if they even managed to shut the TPB down (which they can't) don't they understand another 5 would spring up in it's place.
Nine Inch Nails get it - http://blog.wired.com/underwire/2009/04/trent-reznor-wa.html - the rest of the music industry should sit up and take notice.
Complain about this comment
I have to agree with an earlier comment: this is a great advert for The Pirate Bay. They wouldn't normally get much of a look-in the the mainstream media, but now there will be many, many members of the public visiting the site and thinking ''This is great, I wish I'd known about this before now.''...
BTW, it's wrong, but it's not theft - it's violation of copyright. Theft 'takes' something from someone without permission - denies them something. Copyright fraud may do that (if you would have bought the product for example), but it may not (if you wouldn't have bought it for example, then no money has been lost to the copyright holder).
Shout about it being wrong, being illegal, but don't confuse things by calling it theft.
Complain about this comment
@dsroberts - if you could somehow tell people to visit a company that you had no affiliation to that could produce a t-shirt which required no resources to create and was able to fit every person that wore it regardless of their girth, while the original t-shirts came only in size XXS....
TPB wouldn't have anything on you to complain about: you are not the one producing the t-shirts...
Complain about this comment
But how do these artists benefit in any way from their material being downloaded for free? To me, 'file sharing' just seems to be a nice way of saying 'passing round stolen goods'.
The Artists can benefit by the illegal down loader really liking their sound or album and then PAYING to see them in concert/live gigs, perhaps with accompanying friends, that's how the artists can benefit.
Complain about this comment
Time the gramophonic industry met its comeuppance. For how long have we been forced to buy CDs for the sake of maybe one or two tracks - with a dozen other unwanted drizzly tracks attached to them?
The music companies have been well aware of this since the LP era - get one hit track on a CD, the rest, filler that the buyer is forced to take.
Complain about this comment
Thanks to all for putting me straight on the BitTorrent issue :)
One question here though which might be relevant is whether all/the majority of the torrent links that TPB hosted are for copyrighted material? For Google and Yahoo, yes, you can find links to illegal material on them, but by a long way the majority of links are perfectly legal. If TPB went out of its way to provide links to illegal material, that surely is why the industry went after them.
Complain about this comment
the phonographic companies owe us thousands for the rip-off prices we paid.
Complain about this comment
@yazbod
P2P software such as bittorrent has many legitimate uses to. For example most Linux distributions are made available via torrents. Heck, even the BBC's iPlayer uses P2P technology.
Complain about this comment
I hope this precipitates the collapse of the music industry. I can't think of any other business that abuses its customers so flagrantly as that parcel of rogues.
At least if that happens, we'll still have music, and the addled beancounters that run the big labels will have been pushed out of the way (for a while).
Complain about this comment
I'd never even heard of The Pirate Bay until there was an article on the BBC website a couple of years ago. Next to the article was a link to the TPB website ! If it wasn't for the BBC I'd have never known of its existence. What a great advert this is.
Complain about this comment
purpleDogzzz wrote:
"This would be like back when the home video recorder first came out, going after SONY for giving people the technology, or going after Maxel for making the tapes. All Pirate Bay is is a signpost to the software that allows the download"
Umm... they did go after Sony for making the Betamax machine! Get your history right!!
Also this is completely different to timeshifting.
Complain about this comment
I must say that i just cant afford to go to the cinema all the time and the only way that i can watch a good film is to purchase it and that is why i download films to see what they are like. A case in point i wanted to see Knowing so i found a site that i could download the film so i downloaded it and on this site i noticed Slumdog Millionair so i thought that i would download it to see just what the fuss was all about and as a result i will not only be purchacing Knowing but also Slumdog Millionair as well and if it was not for places like pirate bay and the like i might waist my money on crap that i dont want
Complain about this comment
So, if TPD is guilty of "assisting in making copyright content available" then surely so are ALL of the ISPs which people use to download illegal content.
This is simply a show for the industry. As if a year in prison is really going to do anything. And as they can't shut down TPD it all seems a bit worthless. This will only increase illegal downloads. Not slow it down.
Complain about this comment
@ big_will_p
You've hit the nail squarely on the head there, this judgement has nothing to do with copyright infringement and nothing to do with P2P, it's just a ploy of desperation from the so called creative industry which does more damage to the artists they represent than file-sharing ever could.
The industry has changed, those in charge of it have not, and are trying to punish people for doing what they didn't dare, in a way you could easily compare this case to that which recently took place in F1 - 3 teams interpreted the rules differently, their interpretation turned out to be better so the other teams ganged up and cried foul.........except in this case sanity prevailed and the right verdict was given.
Complain about this comment
clankylad wrote :
"To me, 'file sharing' just seems to be a nice way of saying 'passing round stolen goods'."
Actually - 'file sharing' is a nice way of saying ... um .. 'people sharing files with each other'.
'file sharing of copyrighted material without permission' is a nice way of saying 'passing round stolen goods'.
Complain about this comment
I don't use TPB - I know of much better sites. However, TPB is clearly the face of "evil" file sharers who are "killing" the media industries. I find this news to be a bit saddening but it should be pointed out that piracy will never, EVER be defeated.
After the onslaught of VHS, Tape cassette and floppy disks, It's amazing how financially alive and well these media companies still seem to be.
Would also love to see their figures showing exactly how much money they have 'lost' due to torrents.
Complain about this comment
Legally what's the difference between me downloading the latest episode of Robin Hood from the BBC iPlayer (which uses P2P technology) and me downloading it from a link supplied by the Pirate Bay?
Complain about this comment
This is ridiculous... Instead of wasting years....money and time suing those file sharing sites, they should just try to use it at their own advantage....i.e look at spotify ! The should have embraced the digital age a long time ago. Again... capitalism rules...Ridiculous verdict....!!! probably brided those judges!
Complain about this comment
Oh, thanks BBC you reminded me where to download things for free! Strictly speaking copyright "theft" is not a criminal offence but a civil offence, in other words breach of contract.
Does this mean that the FA will go after every single person who records Premier League matches?
Complain about this comment
I just typed in "Crank 2 torrent" into Google which produced over 350,000 results.
Clicking on many of these links would allow me to download an illegal copy and 'facilitate' me to 'infringe' the 'copyright' of the owners of this film.
Will the authorities now be pursuing the owners of Google?
Complain about this comment
@ Noobsaibot021
I don't think they CAN prove in any way that they have actually lost money because of torrents.
Maybe they have made money? Maybe they have lost it. Unless you compare the same year with and without torrents, which thankfully is impossible, they will never prove anything.
Complain about this comment
Let's put this technology into the physical world and see how legal it is.
If I have a shop window and someone comes along and puts and advert (link) for a service there, then someone else comes along and responds to that advert (clicks on the link) and they then go on to do something illegal in a completely different location, how have I broken the law?
The simple answer is that I haven't. This verdict is a joke. It really isn't that far from locking up car dealers that sell to drivers without a license or gunshop owners that sell arms used in robberies or murders.
The record companies should be going after the individuals that are actually hosting and sharing the files. Alternatively, they could look at their business model and realise that paying people £30million a year even if they don't release an album, paying executives several million a year plus bonuses and then hawking CD's for £10 and DVD's for £20 when the actual production cost is an embarassing fraction, might actually alienate some of the market and drive them towards the filesharers.
Complain about this comment
One of the big problems for the creative industries these days is that the Internet has made consumers aware that a lot of content is out there that they probably should be able to get legally, but can't. I torrented two series of an Anime series last week because for whatever reason they aren't available to buy, but fans had subtitled the whole thing and made it downloadable. I have a dvd box set of the first series a foot from me right now, bought legally- were the other two available I'd buy them as well.
It's the fact that the 'black' economy seems so much more lightfooted and accessible than the legal route that leads a lot of people to torrents, not some sort of deep seated criminality.
Complain about this comment
I live in country where the press, tv, radio and cinema are not in my native language. Most of my favourite TV shows are at least a season behind so why should I pay the price of not having my viewing pleasure at my leisure.
We live in a connected world, an 'instant on' social network whereby we can communicate and share instantly without fear of censorship or nanny state governing our every move.
Anything that compromises our freedom of thought, speech, act or deed has to face consequences of their actions.
We are all born with the knowledge of self expression and opinion. The internet just affords us with an instant source or audience, we give and take in equal measure - the Pirate Bay just filled a need for instant gratification - who has the right to place their restrictions on our freedom.
Complain about this comment
What are the artists going to spend their hard-earned dosh on other than propping up the Colombian economy?
If the likes of Mozart & Beethoven can die paupers, how can anyone justify Michael Jackson & Elton John living in luxury.
Complain about this comment
Mel Gibson is set to lose half of his $680million dollars in a divorce. Would his films have been any better (or worse) if he had only made $500,000 per year and only ammassed a personal fortune of $6million?
I think there are a lot of filsharers thinking "why should I give people like him another $20? I'm struggling on minimum wage. The actors in the local theatre are just as good as him and live on minimum wage. He's almost a billionaire! It's a joke."
Inequity and injustice are always the driving force behind any revolution. The collapse of Warner Bros, Sony and EMI might not be such a bad thing for music and films. Maybe we could get some movies that don't rely on expensive CGI and effects? A modern Casablanca, The Shining, A Beautiful Life, Brief Encounter or even Star Wars? Maybe we could get some music that isn't a hurriedly rushed-out clone of last months biggest hits? Maybe some where the musicians write and sing the songs? Where the musicians get some of the credit? Where the inability of the singer isn't electronically covered up because they've got a great rack and their body sells?
Pipe dreams, I know but something to aspire to.
Complain about this comment
Why is it that the American’s believe that they can commit any crime even war crimes and be untouchable yet the same scum prosecute any one outside the USA for not paying them blood money for anything that they say they own.
The best thing anyone could do is avoid anything made in the USA, avoid any company registered in the USA. In other words black list the country. Just because governments in Europe beg and bow to the USA does not mean we have to. Support your country and make the yanks bust. This trial would not have been held against an American company.
Complain about this comment
It really is naive of IFPI and MPAA since you can use Google to download DIRECTLY from hosts and not have to use BitTorrent! The technology is way ahead of these guys and by the time they catch up, people will have gone onto the next level. E.g. there are plenty of users of 'darknet' out there swapping files at high speeds, using anonymisers and invites only. If I want to watch a cult/art film that had limited release, finding the DVD can be near impossible. Never mind the region copy protection BS. Download? No problem. I can buy a CD, rip it, sell the CD to the second-hand CD store and no one complains. But if I give away that rip...
Many artists release as BT, and ask for donations if you like the music. Most people do not abuse that. Just think, no more Eddy Murphy 'comedies' because NO ONE WOULD PAY!
Complain about this comment
Well I have to say I'm not surprised by the decision. I suspect that it will be overturned on appeal though as
I think the music, game and film industries tend to ignore the potential benefits of downloading content through torrent sites as a means of previewing it and increasing future sales.
Here's a perfect example. I downloaded a game called Fable for the PC the other day. I'd never played it or shown any interest at all in any reviews I'd seen for it until a friend bought a new Xbox 360 specifically to play Fable 2, which is exclusive to the 360. I decided to download the original to see what all the fuss was about. I didn't want to pay for it in case it was something that I didn't like. It turned out however that I really enjoyed it, and subsequently I've bought Fable 2 so that I could continue the story. Without the benefit of torrent sites that's 1 more sale that they would never have had. I'd be surprised if this a rare occurrence.
Complain about this comment
...and filesharing is NOT "passing round[sic] stolen goods"
Filesharing is mostly from one person having legally bought the item and it's copyright and then uploading and sharing it with people.
It is more like going to a bookshop, buying a book and then letting all your friends read it too, rather than them going and buying it as well.
Are you gonna lock up every member of a book club?
Complain about this comment
"The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites" Are you sure, it didn't work for TPB
Complain about this comment
I cannot be bothered to read all the comments so if anyone has made reference to this I apologise, anyhow, If Pirate Bay has been found guilty of copyright infringement then why hasn't Google been taken to task for doing exactly the same thing, for example you can type into google search, "serials and keys" and they provide links to sites which provide keys, cracks for software which is provided as trials from sites such as Microsoft. Seems to me that if it hasn't got a "Made in the USA" label on it you are stuffed. If they didn't want us to copy, share software, music, films etc etc then they should never have made the software available to allow us to do it. Microsoft surley has the technology to put in place blocking software within it's operating systems that prevent downloading unless its from paid for sites.
Complain about this comment
I agree totally with arny5000. This should have been a watershed moment when these companies realise that there is a new way of communicating, accessing media, and shopping in general. Their attitude here is exactly like that of a panicked dictator whose regime is threatened - just throw everything they have to crush any opposition. What they should be concentrating (and spending) on is making legal music more easily available, cheaply, without their ridiculous Digital Rights Management restrictions. When I buy a CD or a game, it's mine and I can do what I want with it - DRM essentially only lets me rent it at full price.
It can be done - iTunes proved that. Many people would be happy to pay a fair price for a guaranteed high quality, easily-accessible legal download - but they instead keep trying to force people to use the old systems.
The revolution is already well under way and the big labels need to join it or be against the wall.
Complain about this comment
@Zarquan,
'file sharing of copyrighted material without permission' is a nice way of saying 'passing round stolen goods'.
Still not right, there is a difference between copying something that you shouldn't, and actually stealing a tangible item that the original owner is then deprived of. It's a moral point that the big media companies would like us to be ignorant of.
I think historically this will be seen as one of the last dying gasps of the old style big media corporations. The winners from the current situation, I hope, will be the artists who are seeing a business model that gets them closer to fans. They have been shafted by the big corps and once they open their eyes they realise that almost any business plan can be better than the pittance they used to get.
Complain about this comment
2ADL277 wrote: The Artists can benefit by the illegal down loader really liking their sound or album and then PAYING to see them in concert/live gigs, perhaps with accompanying friends, that's how the artists can benefit."
And how exactly would that benefit the artist more than someone buying their album legally and then going to see them live? And of course if the illegal downloader doesn't like their sound and doesn't go to see them live then the artist doesn't benefit at all.
I wish people could just admit that they download music etc. illegally because it's easy, 'free' (to them anyway) and seems far away enough from the very real criminal offence that they are participating in to not bother them, rather than all this self justifying guff about "internet freedom" and "corporate profits".
Thieves. End of.
Complain about this comment
Just looked at
http://www.mediabynumbers.com
Although this is for the US market it tells it's own story - year on year comparison.
Thursday Jan 01, 2009 to Sunday Apr 12 2009
Running Gross Attendance
2009 $2,756,200,000 +14.57%
2008 $2,369,415,973
So it seems the US Motion Picture industry is really struggling with nearly $3 Billion in ticket receipts and an increase of 14.5% more custom.
Let's all shed a tear for this poor, poor failing industry due to the nasty people at TPB.
Complain about this comment
These guys are stealing intellectual property that has often been created by small independent filmmakers and individuals who defer fees to get productions off the ground.
The impression they like to portray of rebel heroes fighting enormous corporate giants is just an excuse for an arrogant lack of understanding about who should pay for creativity.
Why should you be able to get these films free?
How would anyone afford to get a new film or tv series development off the ground if no one felt the need to pay for it?
Complain about this comment
chad1976 compares file'sharing' to a book club!
Comparing file 'sharing' (stealing) to a book club is just naive.
You cannot compare a worldwide broadband network with access to any pirate content at the click of a mouse to 'buying a book and then letting all your friends read it too, ' - you are entirely missing the point!
Complain about this comment
Piracy hurts the artists does it? If their contracts actually passed on a sensible percentage of the profits, that argument could, conceivably hold some water. Under the current circumstances, stealing an album costs the artist something in the region of 10p, the remainder of that money would have gone to the music company. Now if we assume another 90p of purchase price covers advertising costs & recording of said artist, the true cost of an online album is well under 2 quid, so why are they the same price as the cd? And if you do download it, the product is not actually yours, it's subject to the company being around to allow you use of it, even assuming they haven't dropped support for the system you bought it with. Terrible service for way too much. Buy the CD and rip it to the format of your choice, and you can use the music as you want to.
Complain about this comment
Morally they are just simple thieves. If someone had a way of stealing cars and letting others use them, would that be morally OK? No. It's only because IT technology allows it that it exists. It doesn't make it right. They are stelaing something that someone else had to pay for.
Complain about this comment
Of course its not "public enemy" because millions of the public are against the greedy and wrong copyright - the way an elitist few can keep milking money out of a piece of work they did ages ago.
Its like the Prohibition of america, politicians forcing something on the people, that the people does not want. Eventually honest politicians will have to change the copyright laws.
Complain about this comment
I assume that since the pirates have been stealing the bread from the mouths of the artists, the industry will be looking to divving out the compensation rather than Warner Bros, Sony Music Entertainment, EMI, and Columbia Pictures lining their own pockets.
Complain about this comment
Oh dear. ag_mac has completely missed the point of rhetorical statements and their effectiveness in intellectual debate.
The point is how foolish it is to try and prevent filesharing in this way, just as it would be ridiculous to go after book club members.
Releasing films globally will prevent some illegal filesharing. Releasing digitally online at the same time would reduce illegal filesharing. Having a much reduced price at the box office or digital outlet would massively reduce illegal filesharing.
AS long as people feel ripped off, they will not see it as immoral to illegally download. That is a fundamental principle being singularly ignored by the IFPI, MPAA and large media companies.
Also, to claim that TPB is harming the small independent film makers is pure BS. Take a look at the listings and you will see blockbuster after blockbuster after blockbuster. People are not going to TPB to find art flicks released by small companies. As you will have seen from previous comments, TPB is mainly used for premium releases or some of the art flicks and cult classics that you just cannot buy legally anymore. In that sense TPB is expanding the potential market and the media companies should be looking to incorporate this in their future business model, not trying to shut the stable door long after the horse has bolted and died of old age.
Complain about this comment
If it is illegal to link to copyrighted content then why have Google/Yahoo/MSN not been dragged through court?
The answer is cash. The 3 companies above would be bale to drag the case out and make it very expensive for the recording body taking the action.
To me, if someone is doing something illegal then they should be taken to court. The recording industry should not be allowed to just cherry pick who they take.
I would like to know why they have not tried to get Google into court - scared maybe?
Complain about this comment
It's a very bad call since TPB works in exactly the same way as Google does.
Especially as you can source the exact same illegal material from Google as any other bit torrent search engine.
I wonder when these agencies will decide to take on Google?
Complain about this comment
@72: I think it should be clear that the case was about the guys running TPB (as the post said), not about TPB itself. They were accused of "assisting in making copyright content available". That's why they've received separate sentences.
"The court said that the four defendants worked as a team, were aware that copyrighted material was being shared using The Pirate Bay and that they made it easy and assisted the infringements. It categorized the infringements as ’severe’. The judge said that the users of The Pirate Bay committed the first offense by sharing files and the four assisted this. The judge also stated that the usage of BitTorrent at The Pirate Bay is illegal". (quote from another source).
@76: Of course they'll say that they've lost billions of dollars because of the file sharing.
And as others have already said, this was all about politics. It will be years until this trial is over. I personally hope that in the end they will win.
Complain about this comment
Too many people getting off track - this is about TPB which is a Search Engine, same as Google and Live search.
TPB didn't host any files and pointed to legal as well as illegal torrents, in the same way google and Live search does.
Yes downloading copy-righted material is illegal and being ripped off for copy-righted material is morally wrong to the public and the artist. But that isn't what TPB did, it's a search engine which filtered on the search torrents.
If you wanted you could probably make a custom google search for torrents quite legally and post it on your own personal blog. As i've used BitTorrent for World of Warcraft updates and other Game Clients with free 14day trials for ages.
And is the goverment thinking of blocking your searchs? ISP virginMedia tried to warn people from going to torrent sites but it's all gone quite from them because they probably realised how many customers they would lose.
Complain about this comment
The record and movie industry's are loosing their power and know it.
Reality shows prove they are loosing their control of 'celebrity'.
Facebook et al. prove they are loosing control of artists.
Poor take up of Blu-ray proves they are loosing control of the medium.
Give it up! Your days are gone now. In have an idea, maybe artists should be paid based on their metacritic rating, not their highly selective popularity rating. It would mean the less known artists get far more money and the 'popular', but rubbish stuff that seems to infest music and film would die off, or seem less attractive.
Complain about this comment
Ohh dear, there go the media companies shooting themselves in the foot again. As they can't shut TPB down, they're only succeeding in advertising it. Their so-called "message" isn't getting through; the legal page on TPB is still up, and far more people are going to see that, now. In fact the BBC's news story links straights to TPB's main page. TPB will be more popular than ever.
I think this is going down in history as the new "Mc Libel" case; they'll almost certainly make documentaries about it. And I doubt that the media companies will ever see that money, free websites don't generate that much revenue. If they are locked up, it'll generate even more publicity when they're released.
TPB may have lost legally (pending appeals), but Big Media lost in terms of their media war. The only ones winning are the lawyers. They win every time.
"The IFPI and MPAA had to take action against The Pirate Bay because to do nothing would have meant sitting on their hands." - That is why they failed. TPB have had the winning tactic since the start. The only winning move was not to play the game.
Complain about this comment
Grossing $2.75billion dollars is not a symptom of an industry that is suffering, especially considering the world recession.
Will Smith isn't having to sell any of his mansions. Nicole Kidman will still earn many millions of dollars this year, despite not being a very good actress.
They are not working with small independent filmakers who defer salaries to get projects off the ground. You will find their "work" on TPB. I still haven't found any niche arthouse productions in their listings. I guess the intellectual property of the struggling few isn't big business or of much interest on TPB, but it is a wonderful smokescreen for the IFPA and MPAA. These organisations are not interested in art or intellectual property unless it sells and sells big. My local theatre has lots of fantastic shows which I am very happy to pay to see. The actors and actoresses are of a very high standard but most will go home to poor accommodation in an old car or by bus. There's many a good live musician in the local bars and pubs, getting £100 a gig and then going back to their day jobs because the music industry isn't interested. There is no money from Sony BMG or EMI going to any of them. The IFPA and MPAA are not feeding money into the grassroots where the poor few are struggling, yet they use them as an argument against copyright theft. Pure hypocrisy.
ag_mac also needs to check the legal definition of theft. TPB has under no circumstances taken something with intent to permanently deprive the legal owner of its posession.
They are not thieves and as such have been bold and brazen in saying exactly what they do and exactly why the media organisations and companies should look at their conduct and why it is driving other people to break the law. The verdict in court is legally foolish and cannot survive a sensible appeal, regardless of whatever moral outrage people feel.
Complain about this comment
This is exactly like with Adobe.
im a 16yr old student trying to run a small business and i use the adobe cs3 suite. its not a legal version, i would never lie to anyone about its origins.
I was never in the position to spend hundreds of pounds buying a legal version of the suite, if i hadnt downloaded it illegally i wouldnt be using it. as simple as that. im not harming the company because im not losing them money... nor are the people that downlaod stuff off the pirate bay.
they were never going to spend the money on the music or tv shows...they would just go without it or find another site to use...i cant see many of the people who use TPB being reformed as to start paying for the media content they use...its just not going to happen!
And lets not forget that people still use these sites with their own risks as most of the torrents contain viruses and malware of some kind.
And also what is the legality of if you have say a vinyl record of a song that you legally paid for, sureley its not illegal to download someones mp3 of it off TPB instead of converting your bad quality recording...its just converting it to a different format like ripping a CD...i dont think the record companies would ever be able to file a case against the average joe bloggs using TPB...
thanks, Joni
Complain about this comment
It's a matter of economies of scale.
Customers will never understand why they need to pay huge sums for products (computer files) whose production (copying) costs next to nothing and can be done by the customer.
Here's some example math:
Developing a new car: 2 Billion$, say. Building one: Each 10,000$. At a price of 12,000, profit per car, say: 2,000.
Selling 1 million of these cars: Breaking even. The customers see this (12000) as a fair price: Most car users do not steal a car.
Developing a film: 200 million. No matter whether the film is great, mediocre or bad, by the time it reaches DVD and TV, break even point is reached in most cases (85%).
"Building" (copying) one: Virtually free. And the customer can do it herself.
Customers thus wonder why they should pay for something that has most likely brought profit to the original producer many times over already, when they do the actual building of the product, and it comes free.
Stealing intellectual property (any data file) is thus clearly not like stealing a material object because producing the original intellectual property is essentially a one-time investment with no reproduction cost.
The industry therefore has the problem that it will have to find a payment model customers regard as fair (ie a price that is in relation to the production cost considered acceptable); right now, it is the industry that just looks greedy, and that will never work.
Complain about this comment
I'd just like to make a very clear and simple statement. I have never pirated a single song or album. I have always purchased GOOD music legally.
But from this day on, due to the greed, lies and arrogance of the music industry, who seem to think that their losses are down to piracy alone, I shall never buy another song again.
Complain about this comment
What? another terrible miscarriage of justice.
I'd rather be a free soul than a faceless automaton from the corporation giants. We all have choices to make, may I suggest actually buying some music as well as downloading it? I download lots and buy some, maybe that's wrong but living in a small hick town where exactly do you go to buy 'Suck - Time to suck, 1970' from? I just get it off TPB. Is that wrong?
This is not over.
Long live TPB.
Frederik Neij, Gottfrid Svartholm Warg, Carl Lundstrom and Peter Sunde - We are not worthy.
Complain about this comment
Well, this might seem like all well and good for the media, but surely the utmost step or challenge that has to be taken, if at all, then it has to be to initiate action against ISP's to not to provide access for the illegal downloads?
And, it isn't exactly a piece of cake to restrict that, is it? I mean it might be possible with high developed countries, where authorities are willing to amend that law. But if one looks at the developing countries (take mine for example - India) and others where, to put it exactly, they authorities aren't exactly tech-savvy which isn't that surprising but even the moderaters who operate at the ISP's doesn't know a thing about world wide web. What do you do with this? Especially, considering the increasing connections, if it ever catches up with even half the population of our country (around 550mil), you've got to be kidding, right? Its tough enough to undertake this kind of a challenge even with extraordinary people, but with one's who can't tell the difference between a broadband connection and a cable connection, or how about e-mail ID's by commmercial providers and ISP providers, or even better not knowing the difference between wireless LAN and LAN?????!
Complain about this comment
A few observations.
1 Calling it piracy (loudly and often) diminishes the moral force of the alleged offence, because equating it with true piracy makes the term ridiculous. Calling it stealing is the same mistake. This is obvious - so why do they persist with it? Stupidity? massively underestimating the intelligence of the public? Or - insert conspiracy theory here..
2 Pitting large multinational corporations, lawyers and multimillionaire celebrities against a few hippy ethos computer geeks, millions of teenagers, and millions of average middle class consumers is not a very bright strategy. But as long as lawyers get fees for enforcing laws designed for a previous millennium, this will continue.
3 Very few people stop to think about the complexities of intellectual rights or copyright law. And why should they? Life is too short. But most people can tell right from wrong. People are designed to be good at recognising and operating within social contracts. Most people of the computer generation have voted with their mouse clicks.
4 If you're happy about the morality of current copyright models, ask yourself if it is right that any human being be paid repeatedly for a few hours of work done many decades before. (I think yes - but with many qualifications). A painter does not get a fee every time someone looks at their work in a gallery. Most people have to go to work every day to get paid. What's so special about performers? Are you happy that elderly debauched peadophiles can continue to generate money for themselves, their lawyers, managers and record company executives, without lifting a finger, for decades?
5 One might ask how much money media corporations have spent in an attempt to stop an activity which, in reality, has cost them very little, if anything. A download is very clearly not the same as a lost sale. Then one might ask why the corporations are so anxious, and consider the depressing phalanx of relationships between money, power and the law. And one might then consider how many people on this planet are living in absolute poverty and one might wonder what they would make of this discussion.
6 TPB embiggens us all. Opening up the world to the possibilities of sharing everything and everything from anywhere should be a good thing. Suppressing the free exchange of art has rarely been a good thing, or done from good motives. A new balance is required.
Complain about this comment
Basically the problem is a question of language and its degeneration as the subject "professional creative industries" simply doesn't exist. We talk about traders that bought monopols.
It's an ideology term hiding piracy. Instead of an open market copyright laws produce monopols that are used to keep prices from leveling at reasonable heights.
You have great amounts of money? Simply buy the right to trade exclusivily and double up your investion at least once a year. Creativity? Yes, mainly used to legalize what should be called robbery. Money for nothing.
Complain about this comment
For all the criticism of the music industry you can be damn sure that even with a more equitable split of revenue, people would not pay for their films and music given the choice.
As long as free file sharing exists it seems that the choice for the artists is a limited share of revenue (from record companies) or none at all (from file sharing (stealing))
I look forward to the digital utopia when power is finally removed from these 'evil' corporations and all these file 'sharers' voluntarily turn their backs on theft - dream on!
Complain about this comment
It's wrong to say that bittorrent should be banned as like said above that's like banning knives as some are used for crimes.
But this ruling is just like banning the argos catalogue as it contains knives that might not be used legally.
If you profit from sharing or selling other people's work ie. if you make people pay for downloads, or you convert their work into a physical cd/dvd then you should pay the creator.
Otherwise information should be free to pass around and convert to whatever format you like without having to have some government or overbearing record company looking over your shoulder and making you sign stuff and make you feel an outlaw if you do what they don't want.
Complain about this comment
If the industry sold products at a reasonable price, and without DRM restrictions then there wouldn't be a problem with piracy.
People resent Angelina Jolie being $10,000,000 for 2 hours of film. The sooner they stop paying the topliners ridiculous amounts of money the better.
For example, Mel Gibson's divorce proceedings this week. The press claim he has a personal worth of $680,000,000. People see this figure and RESENT it. They also aren't stupid, and see that DVD they brought 18 months ago reduced from £15.00 to £4.00, knowing full well profit is still being made.
They see this global world where we can communicate within minutes to anyone, yet movies delayed from release from between 3 months to a year to suit the distributors... TV shows that are shown in America and the UK 9 months apart. Its all about how, where and when consumers wish to consumer this content, and when the industry deems you to be OK to see it.
The sooner the industry gets less greedy, shorten release windows, and realise that people won't accept the ridiculously high prices to pay ridiculously overpaid "talent" the sooner they won't have a problem.
Complain about this comment
Good music is good music. File sharing is the future and the record companies involved just want to keep ripping us (the punters and the artists) off like they did in the 70s 80s and 90s.
I should think the conviction will be overturned at appeal as it is completely groundless.
The publicity this will generate will hopefully give more artists a push in the same direction as a few have already decided to tread.
Why do you need a major label to take 90% of your profits? Put up a website, start a myspace page, chuck a few free tracks out there and charge for a few more.
Like i said, good music is good music, if it's good you're going to be successful anyway, the only difference is that the suits won't be there to take it all away.
I don't know enough about the film industry to comment, but I'm pretty sure that I've heard about films in the last few years breaking box office records? And is it healthy that one small part of the world should be responsible for such a large proportion of motion pictures released to the general public?
bring on the revolution
Complain about this comment
One of the main reasons that films and music end up on the Internet prior to release is down to the neglect of the film and music companies. In trying to get their product in the public eye by way of pre-release material going to music/film critics, popular webzines etc. they are placing huge trust in many people which is simply being betrayed.
Various popular music webzines, for example, will have a large bank of unpaid writers who do it for the love of music. Record labels will send pre-release zip files of the mp3s to the site which are then placed in a "secure pool" - a writer will say "I want to review that" and download it - however, as they can see all the links to all available albums, they can easily download every album and provide the link and password to others.
Before you know it, hundreds of people will have access to the album ahead of the actual release date and this number will increase as it spreads onto blogs, Torrents and programmes like SoulSeek etc.
So, in an effort to promote their product they effectively shoot themselves in the foot and rely on people who like the artist and those that want the tangible product to obtain it in legal ways.
And, as many have mentioned, google is the first port of call for many people to download "illegal" content. With a litle knowledge, you can use google to find a link to any current or old album (or even before the release date), pretty much any film and any TV show. These links will be either torrents or hosted on sites such as Rapidshare (which do remove copyrighted material upon request). To me, The Pirate Bay is no more than a specialised Google and if this ruling gets repeated in other countries then Google and other search engines will have to be regulated otherwise we will realise what we already suspect - this is not a level playing field.
Complain about this comment
What actually were the charges they were brought down with? I haven't actually read that yet, because if its something to do with illegally distributing copyrighted files, then this case shouldn't even exist. They just point the way.
Complain about this comment
Dear all,
the organised state is trying once gain with all its power and control over our lives to jail more young people who were not prepared to be converted to consumers of the virtual economic model of our modern bank money maker society - now in shatters - and of its products - that have brought our planet to its knees. The same corporates that have funded wars on the name of Democracy - based on lies and false testimonies - but do close their eyes to the obvious violation of humanitarian rights few days back in China now in Thailand or even as we speak in your own countries as the value of our work has become for many equal to that of a ransom to slavery. This is how our Universities have become market places, where young scientists lives, scientific work and IPRs of new technologies are generated and acquired by several of tehse corporates in exchange to tuition fees or RAs to pay back loans. The Westminster bridge where some of us have fought Thatcher and the alikes exacvtly to stop this 20 years ago is not the past, is indeed today. Resist them and struggle to remain humans...after all dignity is all we have left. Stop the new slavery...you can!
Complain about this comment
Quote: peej2k6
You think having delayed the releases by 6-9 months is ridiculous eh? Well, here in my country (India) most of the american or any other english shows are about 3-4 yrs delayed on average basis! How ridiculous is that?!
Complain about this comment
But in all this huge showdown, the real clincher has to be the judgement being leaked from the courtroom, isn't it? Now, how did THAT happen?
The same way the movies and the songs got into the internet before they got released! So, there are criminals who are spreading information from the court of justice for free to others. Now, according to the swedish law, how many years are you supposed to get for that kind of criminal intent? Surely, this is no small matter to the corporations? What if the accused had come to know the judge's thoughts before he said it in the courtroom? It could have had a serious consequence on these production houses now, wouldn't it?
Complain about this comment
Gosh, how strange that my earlier comment #54 has gone off to Modland. I thought it was pretty inoffensive. Let's try rephrasing:
This is all very counterproductive. Not only, as others have already pointed out without being modded, does this create huge free publicity for illegal file sharing, but using strong-arm legal tactics makes the record industry look like the Bad Guys. I can't see that helping their cause.
Complain about this comment
In my opinion recording artists are aware of this rise in illegal downloads and are already doing something about it ie touring.
Madonna's Sticky and Sweet tour was the highest grossing tour last year, making her far more money than her current album Hard Candy.
Surely anything that makes artists play live is a good thing.
Complain about this comment
Hurt money go to jail.
Hurt people get a slap on the wrist and walk the streets again.
Honestly our society has it's priorities the wrong way around.
Still I worry all day about Simon Cowell with the credit crunch and all will he be getting to keep his Maybach?
I shudder to think how U2 will cope.
Complain about this comment
I see in the article the BBC has linked to the Pirate Bay. Can I assume that the Beeb will be next in court? :-p
Complain about this comment
@wazzaon06 "You think having delayed the releases by 6-9 months is ridiculous eh? Well, here in my country (India) most of the american or any other english shows are about 3-4 yrs delayed on average basis! How ridiculous is that?!"
Completely an utterly.
Not to mention that these companies are preaching to the converted. DRM is enabled on legitimate purchases, meaning those that are legitimately purchasing a product are punished with limited installs and locations that a piece of software or music can be played.
The adverts for "piracy is theft" on DVDs and the "Knock Off Nigel" adverts in the cinemas are played to legitimate PAYING customers. Those that pirate do not see ANY of this content because it is stripped out and removed on the content.
Its a ridiculous situation, akin to the home taping panic of the 1980s.
The sooner these greedy overpaid fat cats realise that all they are doing with DRM is punishing the legitimate honest customers of a product, the better.
PirateBay didn't host anything. They simply pointed it out. In that case I look forward to seeing all the major search engines prosecuted for pointing to illegal materials, for allowing images to be searched that aren't owned by them, etc.
Consumers drive demand, not these monopoly groups. They tried holding back digital music for years, and its only this year that DRM has finally started to be removed, some 11 years after Napster first came to be. Its a sad situation where an industry is destorying itself by blaming its own legitimate customers, and its telling that a game like Spore, which was expected to sell in excess of 5 million copies, sold 2 million copies, because of its 3 install limit.
They want to control sales, and resales. Sorry, the consumer is refusing.
Complain about this comment
@rubbishgay "Madonna's Sticky and Sweet tour was the highest grossing tour last year, making her far more money than her current album Hard Candy."
This has always been the case. When the band TLC were at the height of their fame, releasing songs like Creep and Waterfall, the artists themselves, they made 1 cent each per copy of their album CrazySexyCool, from an album that cost around $10 at retail.
Everyone gets shafted, except the record companies themselves.
Complain about this comment
There is a lot of the usual bashing of the Movie and Music industry here, which is rather predictable and rather ignorant.
1. Pay for the stuff you really want: most people simply steal stuff they like via P2P. They don't use it as a "trial" tool.
2. We (consumers) must be willing to pay the Creative People (Musicians etc.) - so they can get rid of the Middleman (the so called evil Music and Movie industry).
3. Pricing will adapt: we have seen that stores like iTunes are adapting, prices are coming down and are more sensible. Some competition from Amazon.com etc. helps too. 99 Cents isn't that much for a song - even a student can afford that.
4. No DRM please!
5. Don't always blame the "Industry" for their stupid behavior, most consumers are equally greedy and ignorant.
Complain about this comment
"These are the people caught in the gap between the old model of physical disc sales and the new emerging models of streaming music (Spotify), subscription music (Comes with Music) and legal downloads (iTunes)."
I'm pretty much the poster boy for this group of people.
Almost thirty and with a huge collection of CDs, all bought in the previous millenium.
It's not as if i don't spend money on music though - I spend a fortune every year attending concerts and festivals for bands that I like. I just don't agree with paying for recorded music. If musos want to make money from me they need to pick up a guitar and earn their keep.
The irony for me is that my behaviour won't change until the model changes.
Adn the longer they take to change the model by wasting time battling court cases, the more people like me there will be as the window gets longer and longer.
Easy way to mend this problem for TPB anyway - just host your servers in a country that has no copyright laws or who doesnt enforce them. There are loads, especially in the East.
A little irony here - buskers make more out of me than any of the music giants. And that's just the way I like it.
Complain about this comment
So will google also be prosecuted because it also lists everything including 'illegal' sites in its search engine? This is really sooooo funny. The Pirate bay should have distributed leaflets in court with where to find some 'illegal' contents on the net to drive the point home and see if they or anyone for that matter would be convicted for that. Because, in reality, that is what they are doing, only that the leaflets in this case is the internet. But then you never win against 'them', do you?
Complain about this comment
how much does a blank CD/DVD cost these days..?????
how much does a original CD/DVD cost these days....????
it doesnt require a masters degree to work out that if the record/film industry instead of thinking of there GREEDY life styles and slashed the prices then there wouldnt be anywhere near as much piracy as there is now.
i for 1 would rather have a dvd collection of all original films than a collection of pirated films, but when your being constantly ripped off by the record/film industries then **** you , when you start to provide us with Value for money things will change, until then there will always be piracy, there will always be a "Pirate Bay" no matter how many you close down, Napster was one of the first closed down in how many years and now the piratebay, how many have come along since Napster..??, and how many have been closed. i personaly know of at least 10-20 sites.
work it out give us value for money thats the only way it will ever stop....
and now when is the BBC going to be going to court for linking with the piratebay..??
and when will google be going to court..????
Complain about this comment
I feel very upset that the TPB crew have been made into scape goats and are having to spend time in prison. You would get less for murder in the UK.
I am looking foward to the media companies callapsing as it would mean a better varity of music and make 'artists' make music because they want to not because they get paid lots of money to. It may also mean the end of band like steps/cheeky girls etc.
Without record sales it just means more live shows because that the ony way to make proper money. Good for fans and true talent.
Also, I have watched movies downloaded and then gone to see them in cinema and then gone and bought the boxsets. When you watch a movie in the cinema if it is rubbish they wont give a refund too! They would with any other product you did not want.
Complain about this comment
Since magnatune.com came on the scene (a legal music site that has fair prices, a fair deal for artists and does not pay a penny to support the RIAA/MPAA in their efforts to sue most of the population i have not needed to use p2p technology such as bittorrent to illegally download music however i still use it for legal downloads such as many linux distributions
when a similar service for films comes out i will not be downloading any films form dodgy sources (i only tend to do that once a film is so old you cant buy the dvd in shops any more or it was only released on VHS
an interesting question in the legality of some p2p files is this. if i download something someone has legally recorded off the television am i breaking copyright law? If i record a film i saw on tv and pass a physical dvd around my friends isnt that the same thing?
Complain about this comment
By attacking sites like Pirate bay, these companies are not solving the problem, in fact they can be exacerbating it. For Instance; once torrenting has been picked to pieces and no longer within the reach of the normal computer user, you will be left with only the tech savvy who will continue to find ways to download this content, and criminal gangs selling pirated content to the now ever abundant consumer who is used to getting high levels of content receiving it it at vastly knocked down sums.
The income generated from the illegal piracy could fund any number of criminal infrastructures from money laundering to terrorism, or people trafficking.
It seems a ridiculous for government to be supporting and even endorsing this kind of hard nose criminalise everyone behaviour, but as always it is for the sake of our capitalist culture, and the large pockets of the political donors. The voter doesn't count.
I for one will make a stand. I will no longer purchase music, films, or literature until the media industry realise that it can no longer maintain the profit margins it is used to.
They have to realise they are only selling semi tangible assets, and the £15 for a bit of plastic and £12 for just data is not acceptable to the public, especially seeing as in many films and tv shows they already make a fortune from product placement.
We will not stand for it, especially considering the extravagant lifestyles they flaunt using our hard earned money (particularly the film industry but the music industry to a certain extent also).
A radical change is needed, and the time is now.
Viva la revolution.
Complain about this comment
I see quite a lot of well articulated comments by fellow bloggers. Indeed, how much was the ticket to see Madonna - not that I would want to - live or even the good old bands on their come back - these I would pay anything to see once more?? 80 to 100 Eur for a concert in a stadium made for cricket with another 70-80 thousand folks. Never mind the poor quality - if the old hags were not back Rock and Punk would have been dead and forgotten contrary to what Neil Young would sing - who can pay this money m8? Who? Enough with the exploitation of music and art in general for their wallets are already fat! By the way m8 .."the revolution won't be televised".. but the wakening of the silent but militant youth will be file shared and... is growing as a tide wave ready to break on the backs of the ploutocrats. Put an end to their ultimate desire to take away our last breath of freedom and our right to entertainment in the name of IPRs protection. Stand by your rights..unite and shareeeeee fileee
Complain about this comment
I think an interesting solution would be for these companies to allow people to continue 'obtaining' the music through file sharing but offering a way to then pay for it. A bit back to front but I believe Radio Head did something not disimilar with one of their albums; allowing people to download for free then if you wanted to you could pay for it. Apparently this was quite successful.
This would at least recoup some money (on an ongoing basis) for these companies. I wouldn't be adverse to paying this way. They wouldn't have to charge a lot either (l hope!), compared to the physical versions (CD/DVD) as the downloader would have to provide and write these if they wanted the media in that format.
I would think that a (trusted) third party would have to write any software that would scan your computer for media though as it may be a bit much to trust the industry not to take you to court for the media you didn't want to pay for (ie. downloaded films which turned out to be unwatchable).
I think there are quite a few people who would be willing to pay for a fair amount of the material they have already dowloaded but there is no outlet to do this in without the likelyhood of being taken to court.
Reverend JT
Complain about this comment
Well after all the fuss I made my first visit to see what this Pirate Bay was all about and have just downloaded one of my favourite tv shows. I predict an increase in visits to this site, rather than making people thing twice about illegal downloading.
Complain about this comment
Viva La Revolution!!! 'The Revolution Will Not Be Televised' is a classic example of what we would not see if it was not for file sharing...
Complain about this comment
Encouraging to see support for TPB and change in the way we buy/obtain media in the comments before mine.
For me, torrenting isn't a clearcut black and white. If a band releases a new album, I'll take a listen, if I like it, I'll buy a ticket to see them live. If I like the supporting band, in the past I've bought their CD and merch (from both bands) then and there. Those bands have made FAR more money from me than if I'd simply decided not to listen because I didn't want to spend £10 on something I don't know if I'm going to like.
I don't often use TPB, but I really hope the guys go free. They are, as a report put it, the Robin Hoods of the digital age.
Complain about this comment
Well in my point of view, TPB is a search engine for the material, as same as the google and yahoo does. Since the actual transmission of the material is happening between the users who downloaded the torrent file will render the same scenario for clicking a search result obtained from google through Internet Explorer without communication to google where in IT terms a 'consumer pulls' rather a 'server push'.
As such I believe this verdict is unacceptable because of if so it makes all search engines like windows Live, google, Yahoo are all liable to the same degree of violation itself and was cleared worldwide already.
Further Bittorrent is a legimate software so that it can't be banned and also prevented.
Meanwhile the verdict might not shut down TPB nor file sharing. But if it so, there will be number of other options to a typical user to can workaround on this.
But my concern goes to the trend which the author figure out for the control should employ at ISP level. Although this is the only possible solution actually to prevent file sharing(a legimate usage of internet) I would like to ask the question that, isn't it violates the individual rights of a person who paid to use the service[internet-broadband].
So I expect this guys get free from the charges. However this case may generate a more social awareness which could drive much more traffic to the TPB rather past and then to file sharing of materials.
In conclusion,I beleive, the peer to peer (p2p) file sharing cannot be prevented completely and also most of users are also is not like to pay the price of original material completely. So in middle point of view there will be a damage to the copyright owners which they should need to tacle turning these shared file as an kind of income generation.
But in the other hand they have made their high and mighty service rendering such as posting 11 obsolete tracks with 2 popular tracks for unreasonable price in the past while not respecting to the choice of consumer has backfired to them through the file sharing. so that they cant do that dirty tricks anymore.
Complain about this comment
Of course the MAFIAA won't go for Google, even though they do exactly the same thing, they persecute college students and grannies.
Don't forget that when you purchase music legally only a tiny fraction goes to the artist, the rest goes to fund these legal witch-hunts. If you want to support an artist go to their concerts, don't buy their CD.
Phillip.
Complain about this comment
This ruling will never end file-sharing - it is a completely pointless exercise and those who brought it about will never get their "Blood Money" and so they shouldn't.
I personally have dowloaded films before their release in the UK, and recommended them to friends - who have in turn (foolishly, as they should have asked me for a copy!) gone to the Cinema and paid outrageous money to watch them.
I wholeheartedly agree with the numerous comments regarding other search engines such as Google/Yahoo/MSN etc - if TPB have been prosecuted why not them - If I haven't been able to find what I want on TPB I usually have a look on Google - and 99 times out of 100, there it is - a link to a torrent site - TPB is just a specialised search engine - and long may it continue
To Gottfrid Svartholm Warg, Peter Sunde, Fredrik Neij and Carl Lundstrom - good luck with the appeal - Hopefully justice will prevail
Complain about this comment
After my post (#14) asking for a legal downloads site that matched the features of 'illegal' ones several people suggested Amazon's MP3 service. I've tried it and although it's a huge step in the right direction it doesn't match the criteria I set out in my earlier post.
In particular it's got a limited selection (there is no file-sharing aspect that leads to the almost unlimited selection on P2P networks) plus it's restricted 3 countries - only in the country I live in (Germany) since barely 2 weeks ago!
And the prices are, in my opinion, excessive, especially in this day-and-age where people typically have MP3 collections of thousands or 10's of thousands of songs. That might be subjective but it's still a fact that the prices are set by a cartel of a few record companies through restrictive licence agreements, totally against any kind of capitalist free-market.
I'd encourage anyone who disagrees with the Pirate Bay judgement to take a look at voting for the Pirate Party in the EU elections. You might not agree with everything on their website (I don't) but they can at least provide some balance in government against some of the crazier laws.
Complain about this comment
As a film maker and partner of someone who makes low budget British films I am shocked though not suprised at the majority of pro-piracy posts on this blog.
I am not suprised however having witnessed someone in my office who claimed to be a great Radiohead fan, when asked to make a voluntary donation to download the music, had no hesitation in entering 'zero'.
It seems that given the option, people will take any opportunity to avoid paying for the creative output of other people. Many posts on this blog seem to think that the music industry 'deserves' it. That doesn't excuse theft.
Complain about this comment
I disagree with people comparing Pirate Bay to Google.
The Pirate Bay was specifically created with the intention of helping people find illegally pirated material.
Google was not.
Btw I download stuff all the time, but making this comparison is disingenuous.
Complain about this comment
#149
The reason for comparing PB to Google is they are both Search Engines.
Granted PB is primarily pointed towards finding torrents, but you can also find them listed on Google.
For this reason people are quite right to question the legality of prosecuting PB and not Google.
Complain about this comment
Yes thanks I'm aware they were both search engines.
But it's pretty obvious to me that there's a big difference between a search engine for the entire internet, and a site that was created with express intention of encouraging the distribution of illegal material. And it's called The PIRATE Bay!
I sympathise, as I'm all for piracy in general but seriously what did anyone expect?! Not that this will reduce piracy in the slightest of course - after all Napster was big in its day but closing it down didn't do much.
Complain about this comment
have not been able to read all posts in full, so if this has been suggested before, sorry.
I think it would be good to turn this whole thing around, consumers forming an association with the explicit goal of suing IFPI and MPAA (and their clients) for damages since we cannot buy the music/films without being held hostage to corporate profit.
Complain about this comment
"[The professional creative industries] want to drive [file-sharing copyright files without permission] to the margins of society - and to do that they have to educate the file-sharers and attempt to eradicate the abuse of file-sharing technologies."
1. That industry is not creative. The artists it juices are. Of course, some untalented people well-marketed by the industry can become good sells (Britney Spears).
2. The industry can't control the masses. They are the dinosaurs and the downloaders are the mice. The verdict was given by the establishment against PB, but the Demos has spoken through the Internet.
3. In a democratic world ISP's can't be asked to monitor their customer's content.
Complain about this comment
I think the BBC is venturing into something they do not know much about.
1. The Pirate Bay cannot control what users upload onto the internet.
2. The Pirate Bay is just a tracker i.e. a Torrent Search Engine, it does not host any material Copyrighted & Not. So sue Google as well because they link to copyrighted material as well.
3. The music and movies that people download from the Pirate Bay are usually tracks that they wouldn't normally buy, therefore the music industry is losing nothing.
4. The Pirate Bay shouldn't have to pay £2,000,000 because they have not hosted material to that value or even close, it should be the sites that host them that get the £2,000,000 fines.
Complain about this comment
As the owner of a very small software company, pirates are little more then leeches, taking the labors of others and decreeing it all worthless.
They create nothing of any value themselves and when challenged on their modus operandi they adopt a different standpoint each time. Arguments change from "It's buggy and deserves to be cracked" to "It's too expensive" to "copy protection is wrong" to "We're actually helping you advertise your product" to "I wouldn't have bought it anyway"
In each case the logic is distorted to suit their own ends, which is fundamentally "I don't believe in paying for anything if I can get away with it."
Piracy may massage the egos of the terminally greedy and spoilt children who perpetuate it, but in the real world it serves to remove potential revenue that could be used to pay someone else to do a job of some worth and in turn benefit many.
It also pushes passionately independent developers into the arms of big business by turning what should have been a level playing field of international e-commerce into one biased towards either the pirates or the corporates. Middle ground in this environment is impossible because pirates make no discrimination against big or small, rich or poor, ethical or immoral. To the pirates, everyone who creates digital media is the same and it makes no difference if it's a self-published niche artist or a major record label's big signing. Similarly, it simply doesn't care if you're a lone software developer from Poland or Microsoft.
This kind of irrational and indiscriminate larceny is why many independent developers (many of whom may have started out with altruistic intentions) end up being forced into the hands of big business. The fact is that the corporates are rarely dependent on a single revenue stream and can offset the losses in digital media caused by piracy against another more profitable areas. Additionally, it's only these types of companies that have the budgets to legally challenge & fight those who undermine the efforts of the genuinely creative.
Google are almost as guilty as PirateBay of perpetuating piracy. Just search their Blogspots and you'll see a plethora of 'bloggers' who upload files to places like Rapidshare under the disclaimer "I don't host the files and I didn't upload the files. I just point to them."
The odd thing is that most of them are password protected by the same blogspot name. That's an indication is the ego's involved here.
However, if you try filing an abuse complaint with Google, your correspondence will be posted on Chilling Effects.org. Here, while they may remove your name, they will leave your zip code and company name clearly evident and due to this I have known of threats being made by pirates to lone software developers who have dared complain that their work is being stolen. In some cases, if they've worked from home, their family has been threatened too.
As for Piratebay not hosting anything themselves, they act as a portal for those that want to break the law and actively encourage and promote it. In other circumstances this is called "aiding and abetting" or "incitement"
The sad thing about all of this is the loss of any middle ground or balance when it comes to emotive subjects like the internet and "freedom". A friend on mine in the UK made a salient point in that there was no speed limit on the M1 in the 1960s until someone took liberties and drove at 125MPH. Now, years later, every moment of our driving is regulated and governed by a law.
One day the same could very well happen to the internet and who will we blame for that? The ones who created the roads and cars or the ones who decided to drive recklessly?
Complain about this comment
The Moneymen never complained when we went out and bought Cassette decks and Video Recorders but they had no control over File Sharing and they really hated that, not because we were doing it but because we found a way to pass them by and they missed getting their 10% for doing nothing.
I wish the Pirate Bay four much luck with their appeal !
Complain about this comment
Re comment 155. If the majority of your "customers" don't believe they should pay for your product AND they can easily get if for free anyway, why do you carry on making it? Doesn't seem like a sound business proposition to me. Yes your product IS worthless if you can't get people to pay for it, just like in any other business. Ways the film industry is responding to piracy include producing 3D films, which can't yet be copied using a camcorder. Musicians have realised that they can get paid for performing live. The need to possess downloaded content in any event is reduced by outfits like YouTube, which let you hear almost any artist (for free) WITHOUT needing to use up your own disk space with downloaded files.
What's "unfair" is that owners of the means of re-reproducing content using an old technology (CDs) feel they have a right to continue to charge as though they were distributing using that technology. This 'right' is what the millions and millions of people who enjoy free content are questioning.
In history I believe there was a similar contest between scribes, who made their living from their ability to read and write, vs publishers and educators, who put the scholars out of business by encouraging and teaching people to read and write for themselves. Do we prosecute literate people now on the basis that they are putting the scribes out of work?
Complain about this comment
Nobody is stating the obvious...
If you want to FIAA to get down on it's knee's and beg, to bring it's prices back down to reality and start giving the customers a better product then there is only one thing to do...
Use the power of the internet to start a Global Boycott of buying music everywhere. That means convincing people not to buy from online and not to buy in the stores. Keep this up for as little as 2 weeks and then you'll the music industry crumble and I bet you then we will see cheaper prices, more content and better distribution options for customers.
Until then, the music industry will OWN YOU!
Complain about this comment
The IFPI and MPAA's greed will live-on!
They have seen objective research which shows that the people who download are also the people who buy the most DVDs etc.
They have been working on profit margins of 1000's of percent for almost a century!
Just how greedy can these people get? They wouldn't like to chase after all these companies that are bombarding us with spam would they?
The courage of our four Swedish cousins will live on just as long as the IFPI/MPAA's greed.
Viva la difference!!
Complain about this comment
dsroberts wrote:
"I see they sell nice merchandise to make even more money, how would they react to me setting up a website that links into counterfeit Pirate Bay shops that sell their T-Shirts for little price, and they miss out on royalties. I could nice little mugs, T-Shirts and Mouse mats all with the Pirate Bay Logo on, do you think they`d like that ?"
Yes they would like it actually, in fact it's something they positively encourage. The Pirate Bay cannot be accused of double standards. You simply haven't understood their philosophy at all - try reading their blog to actually understand what they are all about:
"don't forget to copy our creations, we're also peers in this universe. Copy our logo(s), copy our doodles, remix them, make new and better ones. Print them on clothes, sell them. Make a profit for yourself! Or give it to someone you care about. Care about the copying! And remember that copying can never be stealing."
Complain about this comment
"I don't believe in paying for anything if I can get away with it."
This, really, is the entirety of the situation summed up in one sentence. Everything else posted here is concocted to try to justify it.
Complain about this comment
Peter The Tortoise really doesn't seem to be paying attention!
“This, really, is the entirety of the situation summed up in one sentence. Everything else posted here is concocted to try to justify it.”
The implication that people will get-away with anything they can is so, so cynical.
What is it in the majority of these texts that suggest anything other than that people feel they are being ripped-off and that the so-called laws-of-the-land are keeping it legal?
It seems to me the majority of texts here (including my own) are not concocting justification they are clearly stating that they know they've been-had over the years and are now somehow going to make it stop.
The vast majority of Swedes asked; thought that politicians were giving-way to external commercial pressure, but how about an age-old expression for Peter The Tortoise to ponder:
“Rules (amongst other things laws) are for the guidance of wise men and the observance of fools”.
If that was concocted it was at least concocted by one of the finest minds this planet has ever had.
I wonder what The Bard would really have thought about the IFPA?
Complain about this comment
The BBC Advertised TPB to me and gave me a link to the site.
Should I report them to the IFPI and MPAA?
Complain about this comment
I can see the point of view of macmelvyn and peterthetortoise, but the sad thing is that we as British people have been ripped off, by the film, music, and the pornographic industry for years.
The internet has been around for years, and now that people have realised that people can get things cheap/free has changed the way that the public think.
Napster was has been and gone, WinMX has been and gone, and TPB might go as well, but there is always going to be people around exchanging files, people who are technically minded, can find ways around anything with enough time and know how.
I am of the opinion that the copyright laws need to be changed. The artists/actors or whoever is paid a lot of money, whilst there are people who work there backsides of for years and end up with nothing to show for it!
The industry needs to realise that making things cheaper, simpler, region free and dont use DRM, and change the copyright laws so that people who buy a media on the internet (PC) can play it on any platform (Ipod, Mobile Phone they wish!
Then people might start thinking "OK, what's the point when I can pay X-amount of money for a TV episode, or a Movie, or a track."
There is plenty of blame to go round. The industries for not jumping on these sites when they come out, and allowing them to become so popular, search engines for listing them, the News (ie BBC for giving the link out), and the industries and artists for being greedy!
Complain about this comment
One thing everyone is missing here is the problem with movies,music or software is after you pay for it ,your stuck.1 good song on cd,very bad movie or software that doesnot work on your computer or has no online support.
You buy a sweater and don't like it,youtake it back.
Buy speakers that don't sound good exchange them for different ones.
The whole industry has to change.
More than once I have been stuck with bad software or a movie thats hyped up and is just bad.If there was less risk with these items,fewer people would grab the torrent.
Complain about this comment
Let's face it - the Internet is out of control !
Even the BBC use P2P file sharing to distribute it's TV programs. It's an effective way of getting the program out to the masses. OK, they try and control the 'play time' of a program by making it 'expire' but there are many ways of 'recording' the video. The software is freely and legally available from many torrent sites.
As stated in many of the posts - the industry has to change.
Good luck to the TPB guys and their appeal!
Complain about this comment
View these comments in RSS