Illegal File Trading Draws Two P2P Raids In Europe 816
had3l writes "Police in Finland raided the operation of a popular Bit Torrent site and arrested 34 people, 30 of which were volunteers who helped moderate the site. This comes right after the MPAA reported that it would start suing tracker servers." An anonymous reader points to a story (currently at the top of RespectP2P.org's homepage) about the raid yesterday morning of Dutch eDonkey sites Releases4u and Shareconnector.
Set themselves up for this (Score:5, Interesting)
Idiots.
How do we Fix this P2P problem? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Privacy (Score:3, Interesting)
Also, there's a rumor going about that the finnish police have actually made backdoors into a lot of peoples computers by infecting the torrents that were available on finreactor. Quite illegal, if true. That's it for the ethics of the police I guess.
BREIN (Score:3, Interesting)
Next time I bring my camera with me, I will film the commercial
Waste of time (Score:5, Interesting)
Time for the record labels and movie studios to wake up to themselves - they are alienating a large part of their support base. All the expenses of lobbying various governments around the world, and the associated legal fees around every case is being paid for, and funded by consumers who purchase their records!
They should listen to the overpaid Robbie Williams, who said something along the lines of "I dont care, I am rich, if yo uwant my music, just download it!" (He said this in 2002 - I can't find an online source).
PR Blitz! (Score:2, Interesting)
Remember: Moderating on websites may impact your criminal record.
A Vaild Argument? (Score:5, Interesting)
that certainly answers one question (Score:5, Interesting)
I have to ask, since the article points out that police are also striking at eDonkey servers, when the cops are going to be knocking on my door. My son and half the kids in his dorm are swapping/swiping movies like crazy with eDonkey. All of a sudden it looks like I have to get knowledgable about my liability when he brings his computer home for the Christmas break.
Ah, but they DID have the copyrighted content (Score:3, Interesting)
One argument I see again and again with this, is that "they never possessed the original copyrighted materials, only the torrent file", but that isn't entirely true.
In order to create the .torrent file, you have to have the full original source material. Someone had the original source material (movie, dvd, software, game, etc.) and created the .torrent file from that source material. This person then must have given that .torrent file to the tracker server itself (or the person who created the .torrent is running the tracker themselves).
In fact, since the .torrent file has to directly contain the URL of the tracker itself, you can't simply "upload" the .torrent to a tracker and have it function, unless you know the exact tracker URL that server uses to host its torrent files. If you want to put a .torrent on 10 trackers, you have to create 10 separate .torrent files. You can't reuse the same .torrent file for all 10 trackers.
This means the tracker operator and the people providing torrents are collaborating in some way, or the tracker is publishing its tracker URL to facilitate people creating torrent files for it, from copyrighted source materials.
Its a little greyer than originally thought.
This is for the best, really (Score:4, Interesting)
What if George Washington had been captured and executed by the British? Was the Revolution de-centralized enough to survive his loss? Is America's democracy de-centralized enough to survive the poor quality of Diebolds voting machines?
Stuff like this will benefit change, not only in America, but in China and Iran, as well. In those countries, the kids in the universities might be apprehended and clubbed to death by the Moral Police, at any given minute. But with sufficient security and de-centralization, they can still communicate with the outside world. Enough to possibly, one day, bring decent living conditions to the culture of power which uses and discards people as you would a tool.
This is a good thing. Good changes have never come easy, or with a consensus.
I'm still waiting for Palladium. I think that will be one of the best changes, for the good of all Humanity.
In 100 years... (Score:5, Interesting)
Question for legitimate P2P users (Score:4, Interesting)
Let's face it, there are a lot of people out there who are using P2P to illegally acquire and distribute copywrited materials.
P2P is being threatened, not only by corporate executives and ignorant congresscritters, but by people who abuse the technology. P2P will be outlawed outright unless the legitimate users of P2P networks start policing their own.
How? Well that's a good question. A willingness to admit that there is a problem would be a good place to start.
Re:TV Torrents (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:What a haul... (Score:3, Interesting)
Close, but not quite correct. It is worth as much as you would be _willing_ to pay for it. So the actual loss is much lower, but certainly not zero.
Assume 1 million songs get illegally downloaded that would usually cost $1, but the downloaders would be willing to pay at most $0.5. Then the loss is $500k, not zero or $1M.
Re:What a haul... (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:Waste of time (Score:3, Interesting)
Are they really? I mean, you'd expect it right
I've seen a lot of people state when asked, that if they download tracks and like them then they go and buy the Album. That the justification for free downloads is try-and-buy. Do the actions of the MPAA stop people from following through with their purchase?
I expect that sales of singles are on the wane, but that can be attributed to a combination of legal online sales, and the flood of crappy teen pop the industry is churning out these days.
Personally I think that the number of customers who are aware enough to be put off by these kinds of industry antics are so small they're little more than a rounding error. Certainly no where near enough to dissuade the MPAA from continuing. Your average street punter doesn't know what's going on, and frankly doesn't care. Sad
Re:Set themselves up for this (Score:2, Interesting)
What if my reply would contain information that once seen by a slashdot moderator would require an immediate police intervention?
Would slashdot moderator be liable as accessory for seeing my comment and not calling the police?
Re:Few major details (Score:1, Interesting)
I fail to see how the site itself was illegal, there is no law in Finland against providing links to "illegal" material, only distributing it is illegal.
My guess is that the biggest distributors will be fined and that's all.
And BTW, I haven't seen any arrests mentioned anywhere in local media. Where did that "fact" come from?
Re:Set themselves up for this (Score:3, Interesting)
The 'common carrier defense' does not hold, as it is publishing, not carrying, what is going on. For the same reason, a newspaper cannot publish all ads regardless of content, defending themselves by saying they have a policy of not checking them.
Re:What a haul... (Score:2, Interesting)
Thus it is a "infringement" and not a "crime".
[except in the US perhaps?]
Anyone with some legal insight into Finnish Copyright Law care to shed some light on this?
I would expect the Finnish people to be released and their systems returned shortly, as well as the case dropped. Might give the owner a fine, however.
Re:What a haul... (Score:3, Interesting)
I've taken another route that the **AA and BSA can do absolutely nothing about. I simply look for Creative Commons, open source and free software. I'm getting started in Lighting. I am following the open DMX project and it's associated free software. I started looking to free software after getting hooked on Mozilla Firefox and Open Office.
It's true that not everyting is free, but supporting free helps it grow where piracy helps nobody but the pirate. On the Open USB to DMX project, they are offering the completed manufactured device for less than I can build it myself. They provide schematics and the software code for free. I'm ordering several because the device has lots of 3rd party support both commercial and free. Even advanced computer lighting consoles with a large inventory of moving head lights is supported.
The movement is catching on. There were several (still are) propirtory methods to send DMX (lighting control signals) over Ethernet. Most were quite expensive. A wireless link to send DMX over Ethernet wirelessly by one manufacture is about $7000.
Artistic Licence opened up their DMX over Ethernet protocol to the public domain. It's called ArtNet. Now to do the same type wireless control, all you need is a couple off the shelf D-Link wireless access points. Artistic Licence even provides a how to in there FAQ's. Needless to say, Artnet is now becomming the defacto DMX over Ethernet solution.
The open USBDMX dongle is becomming the defacto winner in the USB to DMX hardware department with the most 3rd party support. Enttec was first to market and now have backlog of orders, even though they provide the schematic and software for free.
Info in open USB to DMX is here;
http://www.enttec.com/dmxusb.php
There is nothing Martin or other manufactures can do about it. It's not piracy. The best thing they can do is get on board. Light Factory is selling their software and even sell the Enttec interface. Enttec makes the dongle and is a distributor for LightFactory. They have a great Christmas special on right now. Enttec does not try to lock you into anybody's software. I can use Freestyler, DMX Control, Mandolator, Simple 16, or other software instead. LightFactory does not lock you into the Enttec interface. You have a choice among many DMX adaptors. You can even output ArtNet directly from you PC using your existing Ethernet card if you wish and use one of many ArtNet to DMX boxes out there at the other end of your LAN. Even doing a Wireless link is no longer expensive.
info on Artnet is here;
http://www.enlightenment.co.uk/frames/prod
Light Factory information;
http://www.enttec.com/lightfactory.
The days of buying an adaptor and being locked into that manufactures software or the other way around with hardware is over. Some manufactures with a buggy whip business model will soon feel the pressure of market forces.
In summary.. Don't do the piracy thing. Go open. Support artists that provide legal free open downloads. Don't pirate the rest of their album.
It's legal and good for everyone except the buggy whip manufactures.
It is impossible to kill file sharing (Score:2, Interesting)
Alochol was legalized in the US because enforcing the laws made the mob and crooked officials rich, and because the laws effects on people were not to cause them to stop drinking, but to change when, where, and how they drank.
Keeping these other things illegal is wasteful. Enforcing these laws doesn't help the 'victims' or the 'criminals', and in some cases makes things worse.
More specifically:
Artists do not get more money from RIAA/MPAA prosecution of traders (the lawers might). Crack babies aren't helped or prevented by The Drug War. Neighborhoods do not clean up from the police putting a bunch of hookers and johns in jail.
But to answer your question, there is nothing that 'legitimate' file traders need to do. It can't be stopped. It's just a matter of time before the current social system crumbles before the mighty wheels of the next version.
Re:What a haul... (Score:2, Interesting)
yeah well smoking weed is illegal in some places too. so what? would you rather do whats legally right, or morally right. thats the issue. do we want a society where we have to pay for the privilege of viewing art, or should artists be happy that they are able to create and do it for love of the creation. You think all art will stop if people dont get paid? manufactured art is never better than people who do it for the love. what happened to you man - it used to be about THE MUSIC.
what kind of society do you want to live in. a society where new technology progresses mankind to a state of equality; or a society where a few people with gold plated shark tanks rule us all in a corporate feudal system.
Re:Few major details (Score:2, Interesting)
A year or two later, congress passed a law (I *think* it was part of the DMCA) that broadened the definition of compensation to include just about anything, even false promises. So, maybe an Ass. of America slipped something into Finland's laws, or maybe you've still got the same kind of definitions we recently had.
Re:Few major details (Score:4, Interesting)
Doesn't matter if one actually gained something, but if something is done with an expectation of getting financial gain out of it, then it's a much more serious crime.
Asking for donations alone might be very borderline, but in this case those donations also gave you perks (I *think* better status as a downloader even if you just leeched. not sure, wasn't an user. based on hearsay).
In which case prosecuters can easily spin it as at a thinly veiled attempt to hide 'pay us for (more / easier to get) warez' deal, which definitely means that the admins had in mind a goal of financial gain. Doesn't matter where the money was supposed to be used (hosting fees). Admins got money. 'Financial Gain'. Tough.
There is actually a test case from way back (the time of BBSes. You know - modems - 14.4K HST tech) where a BBS was selling 'bytes' (pay money, get to leech X bytes of latest warez). I don't have idea of the exact resolution of the case, but I do know the sysop of that BBS at least ended up paying sizeable reparations to the companies who sued him (Adobe, MS, Autodesk etc.. the usual BSA members). I don't think he ended up in the jail, but it sure made a huge hole in his pocket. And that case was clearly 'with goal of financial gain'.
It should also be noted that nobody as far as I know has been prosecuted in Finland for piracy unless;
- There is selling / money involved (for example, selling bootleg CDs/DVDs)
or
- Pirated software was used by a company for business use (Say, a company using pirated AutoCAD to save money)
Re:Question for legitimate FTP users (Score:3, Interesting)
Let's face it, there are a lot of people out there who are using FTP to illegally acquire and distribute copywrited [sic] materials.
FTP is being threatened, not only by corporate executives and ignorant congresscritters, but by people who abuse the technology. FTP could be outlawed outright unless the legitimate users of the FTP protocol start policing their own. Couldn't it?
(In case it's not obvious, the above is sarcasm. Neither FTP nor P2P is in any danger of being outlawed. Which kinda blows a big hole in TrollBridge's thesis.)
Only fascism is compatible with copyright (Score:2, Interesting)
To suggest that copying of a piece of work without paying for it somehow gives you the moral high ground is laughable.
To suggest that it doesn't is fascist. Among several major moral philosophies, only fascism is compatible with copyright [slashdot.org].