Will The Pirate Bay Walk the Plank?
Ed. note: This is a guest post by Keith Chapman, a lawyer with more knowledge of BitTorrent and all things tech than the regular crew on the ATL ship.
Avast ye hearties! Especially if you’re one of those hearties using a BitTorrent client to purloin copyrighted materials. Today marks the fourth day in the highly publicized trial against The Pirate Bay, a Swedish company that organizes and facilitates online file swapping. At the heart of the matter, Swedish prosecutors have charged The Pirate Bay’s three chief administrators, Hans Fredrik Neij, Gottfrid Svartholm Warg and Peter Sunde, as well as media savvy Swedish businessman Carl Lundström, with 33 instances of assisting in and preparing to commit copyright infringement. With potential jail time looming on the horizon, not to mention hefty fines and damages estimated north of $14 million, the Times of London has dubbed the case the “Internet piracy trial of the decade.”
If you are just tuning in, find out what you’ve missed — after the jump.
Day One: The Pirates eschewed a traditional ship for a funky pirate bus. Scalpers sold tickets to seats in the courtroom. Prosecutors presented formal charges and wrangled with PowerPoint.
Day Two: Prosecutors mischaracterized how The Pirate Bay actually functioned (TPB servers do not actually house any copyright protected files; they connect users who host such files locally on personal computers). Prosecution drops all charges related to producing copyright infringing copies.
Day Three: Prosecutors present amended charges. Defense attorney for Carl Lundström raises “King Kong” defense, claiming any actual copyright infringement was done by users with names like “King Kong” who are scattered all over the world.
Internet piracy trial of the decade to begin [Times Online]
Pirate Bay Crew Chums Up to Foes Over Lunch [Wired]
Pirate Bay [Gizmodo]
(47) Comments
Comments
Comments hidden for your protection. Show them anyway!
ARRRRR MATEY
WTF? What is this lunatic talking about?
Cool - Swedes kick ass!
Lat: Whatever you paid this guy, ask for your money back.
That writer must be one smart dude because I'll be damned if I can even figure out the title of this article.
I am unable to locate the conclusion to this post. Someone please post a link.
Heh. Keystone Kop prosecutors. Where were they during the Napster, Kazaa, and Grokster cases?
Now I can only get my content from that space alien Alec Baldwin...
"Keith Chapman." Anyone know what an anagram for that is?
"Meh. Inept Hack"
Who does that remind you of? "Hope Winters," which happens to be an anagram for "Inept Whores"
Coincidence? I think not.
Heh. Keystone Kop prosecutors. Where were they during the Napster, Kazaa, and Grokster cases?
Now I can only get my content from that space alien Alec Baldwin...
boingboing.net has plenty of coverage for you fools who aren't following this important trial.
Information is meant to be shared. It is not entropic, unless apathy reigns.
Butt Pirates?
8, close, but you have an extra "e" in there and are missing an "a." He is an inept hack though.
Has anyone seen this bizarre settlement between the NYT and Vicki Iseman. Bizarro...
boingboing.net has plenty of coverage for you fools who aren't following this important trial.
Information is meant to be shared. It is not entropic, unless apathy reigns.
I'm with 7--that seems to be a pretty big faux-pas for the prosecution to make. Several landmark cases decided no more than 10 year ago...they must have been trying to mess up.
13 - Bizzaro? Public figure...you try "hanging out" with a Senator and not make the news.
7 - evidently, they were in sweden.
The Pirate Bay simply introduces one "pirater" to another. They store no files, produce no copies etc. This is basically like prosecuting the "internet" for allowing people to converge and plan various crimes....
wtf is up with the apostrophe in the title? It makes no sense. Although it does make me nostalgic for Elie....
kek
Oh shit, if these people are successfully prosecuted for promoting copyright infringement, it will be more difficult for geeks worldwide to use more bandwidth than they are paying for while stealing copyrighted works!
Fuck! FUCK!
Oh, and Net Neutrality is THE BOMB! Companies that own infrastructure are EVIL. Tiered service models are also EVIL.
Is that the gist of it? IANAL.
My feeble minded friends, need some help? Here are a few extra words to help you out.
Will The Pirate Bay's [of the world] Walk the Plank?
Sometimes I feel bad about nitpicking with grammar.
But, when it comes to the TITLE of a blog post, there's really no excuse for such blatant errors. Come on Kash, you can do better!
21 - Copyrights are for facists. Information is like love, it's meant to be spread (like Zoidberg).
how great it is to be young
If you are going to cover the trial, then put some information in the post. Otherwise, go to torrentfreak.com for trial coverage.
"gwaa... gwaa..." *translation* "king kong was implicated for copyright infringement... Is this good news for godzuki??"
"Oh shit, if these people are successfully prosecuted for promoting copyright infringement, it will be more difficult for geeks worldwide to use more bandwidth than they are paying for while stealing copyrighted works!"
How can someone use more bandwith than they are paying for? How can you use more than your allotted plan's bandwidth? Also, using bittorrent doesn't increase anyone's bandwidth or internet speed. Your statement makes no sense.
retarded article on an important event. WTF? Was there meant to be more?
19, 22 - Looks like the title has been fixed.
Meh, I'm all about the Laserdisc.
22-You illiterate moron. Even if it is intended to be a possessive, there should NOT be an apostrophe. What a clueless (and yes, feeble-minded) putz you are. And no, I'm not your friend. I don't socialize with clueless imbeciles.
28 --
You do it by subscribing to an ISP whose pricing model is based on users not sucking max pipe at all times -- pretty much any consumer ISP -- and then using BitTorrent to suck max pipe at all times (sort of like you, in a manner of speaking).
Voila, other people are paying for your bandwidth.
32 --
Adding the words "of the world" wouldn't have changed "Pirate Bay's" to a possessive. It was just a botched pluralization no matter how you slice it.
If you're going to be a Grammar Nazi, don't be totally fucking inept at it.
"You do it by subscribing to an ISP whose pricing model is based on users not sucking max pipe at all times -- pretty much any consumer ISP -- and then using BitTorrent to suck max pipe at all times (sort of like you, in a manner of speaking).
Voila, other people are paying for your bandwidth."
If there is no actual restriction in the terms of service on specific amount of time you are allowed to use the connection, you are not stealing from anyone, regardless of the basis of the ISP's pricing model.
I didn't say stealing, I said using more than you're paying for.
Fair enough, but if there is no specific amount of download time that you are paying for set forth in the terms of service, then how could you be using more than you are paying for?
A monthly data cap is a different issue. If there is a specific cap (usually specified by some number of GBs per month), then of course that is fair and that is hopefully what you bargained for when you signed up for the service. You'll just hit it in the first week of the month if you max out your download 24/7 and then whe
when it is reached, you are done for the month.
(Sniff) I'm going to miss tpb more than words can describe. Now when I make sweet, sweet love to my sweet, sweet wife I'm going to have to picture my sweatered classmates instead of supple, barely-legal, 18-yr old, nubile teens. Wax it, baby. Wax it clean...
I'll try to put it as simply as possible. On average, someone using BitTorrent to download illegally ripped content is using a lot more of their downstream connection than the typical user. Additionally, BitTorrent turns your computer into a fileserver; and since most users use very little of their upstream connection, this means that BitTorrent users on average are using a lot more of their upstream connection than the typical user, too.
If the typical user used as much of his upstream/downstream connection as the typical BitTorrent content pirate, then the typical Internet service package would be more expensive because the provider would be providing more average bandwidth per user. In short, inexpensive pricing models are made possible only when everybody doesn't hog bandwidth the way a BitTorrent content pirate does.
And I didn't say this as if to imply that heavy Internet use is, itself, nefarious or evil in some way, nor that there aren't straightforward methods (such as bandwidth caps) of dealing with any problems which arise as a result -- I merely wanted to highlight the fact that BitTorrent pirates aren't just stealing protected works, they're also hogging expensive infrastructure in a very systematic way in order to achieve this theft. And even users who are only using BitTorrent for 100% legitimate purposes are still hogging the bandwidth.
Thus, in my wonderfully non-expert opinion, these complaints about Pirate Bay ring hollow.. it's a bit like saying "How DARE they crack down on people who inappropriately use the carpool lane to smuggle bootleg cigarettes?" Even if shutting down TPB negatively impacts legitimate BitTorrent traffic, it's a somewhat moot complaint because the BitTorrent network already has no legitimate expectation of using as much Internet infrastructure as it does. If a big chunk of the trackers and fileservers are directing/hosting illegal traffic, and you can't shut them down without hurting the performance of the network, too bad.
40 - I didn't know that law firm's IT and MIS people come to ATL too!
Maybe Sweden should stick to that whole "immigrant problem."
Maybe Sweden should stick to that whole "immigrant problem."
I understand how bittorrent works. I also understand the argument you are making and the assumptions you set forth that go into ISP pricing models.
All I am saying is that if there is no specific cap on how much a user is allowed to use, that user cannot "hog" something just by using it (even if they use it 24/7) within the terms and conditions in which it was made available to the user. If the ISP does not have enough infrastructure to support users that have been given no limitations on their use of their connection, then that is the ISP's issue. The user has not done anything wrong for using his connection in accordance with the TOS of the ISP, regardless if it is more (or much more) than the ISP wants them to use or which was factored into the ISP's pricing models for its users.
I could care less about TPB and the piracy issue - that is for TPB and content providers to deal with. Although I do think it humorous when content providers try to enforce US laws, especially the DCMA, against people and companies that are not subject to US laws.
4, I agree; Gizmodo's coverage of this was far superior. They only got legal guidance when they needed clarification. I'd expect much more from ATL.
TTTroll, 44 makes the argument I was planning. Most broadband companies advertise high speed upload & download. There is no mention of an upload cap. Essentially the companies are bitching because their customers are using too much of a promised unlimited resource.
On another note, I thought it was hilarious on Day 2 that one of the defendants Twittered "EPIC WINNING LOL" after the prosecution dropped half their charges due to misunderstanding of the technology.
40, While I hear the arguments about how people who pirate media files slow down the speed with which "average" internet users can connect to the internet, such an argument seems extrinsic to the issues at hand in TPB case. Whether or not American ISPs have the infrastructure to allow for a majority of users to upload/download large amounts of data doesn't speak at all to the type of data being transferred. As it is, American broadband speeds pale in comparison to those in Asia (or even Europe). I think Japan and Korea either already or will soon have Gigabit download speeds. The current state of delivering digital media, even the legal variety, requires users to use increasingly large files (iTunes movies, Sony's online store, Netflix streaming, etc.). Whether or not users who routinely download large, often copyrighted material (and who, percentage wise, probably do use a majority of upload space) raises questions of how US ISP pricing models conflict with/support what can be viewed as a general uptick in online file transfers across the board. I'm more interested in 44's question about how to enforce IP laws and protections, particularly on individuals who may not be clearly subject to them.
45, I also agree that Gizmodo's coverage is more entertaining. Also, Wired and Torrent Freak give much more in depth coverage. I thought this was just an arguably entertaining taste and a link to more comprehensive coverage elsewhere. EPIC FAIL?
Eh, I'm not saying anyone is breaking the law or violating TOS. I'm just saying if everyone rolled like that, the cost of Internet access would be higher, or else more ISP customers would be slapped with inconveniences like bandwidth caps, traffic shaping, etc. I also was not asserting that bandwidth hogs are all pirates or that pirates are all bandwidth hogs. But, in my experience, people who like downloading non-free stuff for free tend to do it a *lot*, and a lot of people hogging bandwidth are downloading/hosting stuff illegally.
So basically, I was just saying that people pirating crap in BitTorrent, or more particularly the ones who *do* do it a lot, are getting a free ride on top of their free ride and I'm not really sympathetic to it. And while BitTorrent has many legit uses, like any P2P technology, by and large it seems to be used for shady shit.