Swedes Take to the Streets in Protest of Pirate Bay Ruling

24

Comments

+ Add a Comment
avatar

Sonickid101

http://stealthisfilm.com/Part2/download.php Documentary that explained why all this is happening even before the trial started.

avatar

I Jedi

To be honest, I don't think they should have been convicted. Sure, did they know that there was a possibility that there was illegal content on their website, sure. However, the fact remains that they in no way uploaded the content themselves (As far as we know) or actively promoted it on their website by saying,"PUT ILLEGAL SHIT HERE!". They should of been accuited of the charges and the people who put the illegal content on TPB should be the ones to face trial and be convicted.

avatar

Beta_Grumm

Open sorce software is computer software for which the source code is freely available.

 Valve does provide the means to make 3rd party content for their existing games, but do not offer the source code for a full game redevelopment. It offers the engine and the SDK (source development kit) only if you already own a licensed valve title or some other license that they offer.

There's a difference.

avatar

patrickmaher

Nice Monkey Island reference. I almost missed it in the picture.

avatar

Paul_Lilly

I'm so glad someone got that. Old school adventure gaming ftw.

-Paul Lilly

avatar

quadcoregammer

(*_*)

($_$)

 

thats such a great idea!

NOTTT

avatar

LordPyro

These people are the new hippies.... 1 .50 Cal could solve this problem

avatar

Velcrow

These are the same people that make all that open source software you love to use.

avatar

LordPyro

I don't use any open source software

avatar

AntiHero

Do you use Firefox? WordPress, Druple, Joomla, Thunderbird, any vista widgets for the sidebar, any games from Valve? If so, you have open source software...(Yes, i feel valves games are technically open source since they do give you the kit with the resources to make mods and stuff.)

I don't like Microsoft, I associate with it.

avatar

Stry8993

Ofcourse, I live in Canada, but I don't download movies and sell them, and heck, some movies, I refuse to watch in Cam's, but... some...

 
Put it this way, if a movie isn't worth $22 (11 for you, 11 for your chicky-poo), plus the $600 it costs to buy snacks, and I leave regretting have paid that, me and that gal of mine, are going to sit down on the couch, have some $2 microwaveable popcorn, cuddle up on our nice relaxing leather sofa, in a NOT crowded, well air-conditioned living room, and enjoy it up close and personal.

 

No Sony, No WB, No Lions Gate, none of you guys... are going to get money for SH!TTY movies, I'm sorry. Not from me, not from anyone.

 

Oh, and if it hurts the little guy, like the stunt man, so much, why don't you stop paying your actors and directors millions upon millions of dollars, and share the wealth, without them... well... Tom Cruise might have to put that scientology into some velocity calculations :P

avatar

comptech08

Actually there have been studies done, that 80% of the content that the pirate bay links is legal and the other 20% is the illegal copy infringment stuff.

avatar

schmitty6633

And if you have ever looked at the top 50 on tpb NOT ONE would be a legal download.  The things most downloaded on tpb are ILLEGAL.  Legal stuff IS downloaded but not NEARLY as much as the illegal

avatar

Shalbatana

 Yes, and the stuff that is legal, is all but irreplaceable in many cases. Take for example the indie films and tributes that are just too large to host by an individual long-term.

It also fills the gap for things like "it's available in the UK, but not for sale or even export to the US".

 

There's good and bad to the argument. I'm just not convinced the masses were there to support that argument. 

_______________________________

"There's no time like the future."

avatar

schmitty6633

I doubt anyone seeds that stuff anyway

avatar

Shalbatana

That's right people! Stand up and fight for your right to do what you know is illegal!!!!!

Let's face it. This trial has nothing to do with downloading copies of "Ziggy's Gift" or other great [should be] classics that can't be found anywhere else. If it only went that far, no one would care. These people are out there to protect their right to see copies of Wolverine before anyone even makes a buck off of it.

I'm all for the Napster style archive collection (ie. Quinn's copyright article), but let's face it, the site went too far and all of us know it. The only issue is whether or not the courts think the owners of that site should be responsible. (yes, it's the court's choice, remember them?...their our elected officials). And if the porn sites, and underage pictoral responsibility is any example, the pirate bay owners are certainly liable.

"Well sure", you all say, "that's cause underage pron is ILLEGAL, so of course they should be liable". Well copyright infringement as it stands is illegal too....You can't have it both ways, and let's face it guys, copyright infringement, exploitation of work, and undercutting shouldn't be deemed acceptable just because we want things for free. And if you participate in illegal operations, you have to accept the responsibility.

(now I'm off to download my next torrent) ; )

_______________________________

"There's no time like the future."

avatar

supercourier

The comparison with material that is in and of itself illegal (rather than whether their actions as cataloguers of otherwise legitimate archives) presupposes the argument against which the defendants were charged:  That the law is always based on correct assumptions and is therefore a pre-existing force by which people must somehow live around, not the other way around.

Copyright has been extended far beyond the original concepts of limited periods of benefit before a period of allowing society as a whole to benefit from advanced public domain knowledge.  This is a direct result of commercial interests lobbying (read:  PAYING) legislators to erode this concept. Our current vice president is a fine example of such "pay-for-play" activities.  Legislation such as the DMCA which clearly limits pre-existing rights and was rushed through without any discussion beyond locked rooms containing only lobbyists and legislators only strengthen the average user's perception of corporate greed.

Once confronted with the issue of compulsory self-policiing, these individuals simply tactlessly refused to discuss the finer points in an activity that is roughly comparable to the duties of a librarian:  cataloguing information regardless of its intent and making it available.  They did not even so much as house the works, in the way that one does in a library--where you can freely access, evaluate, consume, and (YES!) copy for personal use the copyrighted works that are contained within them.  Personal use, no financial reward.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

(Hmm...think Walt Disney has been sated yet in his quest for profits from the intellectual property known as Mickey Mouse?  I'll bet his cryonically preserved head he has already!!! )

avatar

Velcrow

Your porn example isn't accurate. With a porn site, the owners actively pursue material to post, and thus are the single controlling factor. They MUST perform their due diligence to ensure the material is not of underage persons. Pirate Bay, however, is an open forum. The owners are not the single point of control and it's unlikely they are even aware of what's been posted.

avatar

Shalbatana

 OK. Point taken, I can accept that. But I know some sites that rely on user submission, and they're still responsible for those.

AHEM.... I mean I "heard" of such sites. 

_______________________________

"There's no time like the future."

avatar

AntiHero

Hahah, caught with one hand in the jar, and the other on the mouse. However, i'm sure any site that allows user submissino has to ave some form of approval rating. Or a star rating? I don't know what but there would be a determining factor that can filter our the good and the bad (young and of age?) A filtering system is necessary. Piratebay doesn't have one because there isn't really much of a system that can be set up. The files are either used for legal or illegal purposes, end of story. I've used piratebay for legal purposes on many accounts (one of them is actually in action at the moment since acer didn't give me an OS disc, i have my os installed from a disc i torrented, while using my license key since i didn't have the restore partition because the hard drive failed, and they wouldn't replace it)

I don't like Microsoft, I associate with it.

avatar

n0ctis

Here's an anthem for the whole thing. Nearby pirate rock act The Jonee Earthquake Band performing their song 'Up With Piracy' http://www.joneeearthquake.com/mp3/piracy%20jonee%20earthquake.mp3

avatar

DePat

Based on the Pirate Bay verdict, we should not be surprise when libraries are sued for copyright infringements. After all libaries make copyrighted materials available (books, cd and movies) for library patrons to take home and patrons can copy them if they so desire (without the libary consent). Unlike libraries, The Pirate bay do not host these materials. All they do is connect people, and the people, not Pirate Bay make the material available to others. Nowhere in the law it is say that connecting people with copyrighted material is an infringement of copyright laws. For the verdict to stand would be a miscarriage of justice. The law has to be changed to include the connection of people with copyrighted material as an infringement of copyright laws. If such a law is enacted, that will mean that the gun manufacturers can be sued for homicides because they make guns available to people who commit homicides, car manufacturer can be sued for car accidents because they make cars available to people who cause car accidents (including fatal ones) and so on. Bending the laws just to acomodate a group (albeit a powerful one) is wrong. The laws have to be changed through the "democratic" process, by the legislatives body. Wether or not we agree with what Pirate Bay does is not the point. We have to make sure that the laws are enforced the way they are written, not the way we wish they were written. If a law does not do want we want it to do we should request our legislators to debate the issue and vote on a new one.  The laws as written, does not prohibit the connection of people with copyrighted material. 

DePat

avatar

jcollins

In this particular case, I don't think that your analogies to the manufacturers being sued is correct.  A better analogy would be for the newspapers/craig's list/search engines, etc. being sued because they had an ad or listing and connected the two parties together.  The Pirate Bay didn't make or touch any copywritten materials, they just "facilitated" the connection.

avatar

AntiHero

Well, the internet cannot be stopped. End of story. Also, I wish I were there, and in this community.

I don't like Microsoft, I associate with it.

Log in to MaximumPC directly or log in using Facebook

Forgot your username or password?
Click here for help.

Login with Facebook
Log in using Facebook to share comments and articles easily with your Facebook feed.