Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
EU Piracy

European Pirates Arrested in Massive Police Operation 278

Posted by samzenpus
from the problem-solved dept.
freedumb2000 writes "Europe just witnessed one of the largest piracy-related busts in history with the raid of the popular movie streaming portal Kino.to. More than a dozen people connected to the site were arrested after police officers in Germany, Spain, France and the Netherlands raided several residential addresses and data centers. Kino.to hosted no illicit content itself, but indexed material stored on file-hosters and other streaming services."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

European Pirates Arrested in Massive Police Operation

Comments Filter:
  • Phonebook websites (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Killjoy_NL (719667) <slashdot@remco.p ... minus physicist> on Thursday June 09, 2011 @04:28AM (#36385040)

    Dear Police,

    According to my research, there are a lot of criminals being referenced in the phonebook websites worldwide, making it easier for them to communicate.
    Please take those sites down too.

    Sincerely,

    Killjoy_NL

    • by torako (532270)
      The only reason kino.to existed was to make advertising money on piracy and the police suspect that kino.to had mutual agreements with the hosters. Now, the law is unclear whether watching an illegit stream is illegal (probably not), so they are not going against the users of kino.to. But aquiring the source material to stream definitely involves piracy. This is more of an organized crime case (and it is treated as such by the police and state attorney), then a "phonebook" thing.
      • "the law is unclear whether watching an illegit stream is illegal "

        Is listening to a pirate radio station illegal?

        • by Taco Cowboy (5327)

          If listening to a pirate radio is illegal then only BIG BROTHER will have control over what is legal and we will all be restricted to listen (and watch) the "LEGALIZED CHANNELS".

          1984 in the 21st century?

        • by metacell (523607)

          It's definitely legal to listen to pirate radio and pirate streams on the Internet here in Sweden. Don't know about other EU countries.

      • by Yvanhoe (564877)
        The law is unclear but the police moves just in case. I fucking love copyright laws.
        • by torako (532270)
          No, the law is unclear about the legality of *using* kino.to and the policy is not moving against the users. What the *operators* of kino.to allegedly did in cooperation with their hosting buddies is quite clearly illegal though and that's what is being investigated right now.
          • by tibit (1762298)

            Care to link to some legal sources for that, in the relevant jurisdictions?

            • by torako (532270)

              Gegen die Verantwortlichen von KINO.TO und ihre Helfer wird wegen Verdachts der Bildung einer kriminellen Vereinigung zur gewerbsmäßigen Begehung von Urheberrechtsverletzungen in über einer Million Fällen ermittelt.

              Press release of the Public Prosecutor General of Dresden [sachsen.de]. They are accusing the kino.to operators of building a criminal organization that infringed in more than one million cases and led to a profit in the seven figures.

    • by Ash Vince (602485) *

      Dear Police,

      According to my research, there are a lot of criminals being referenced in the phonebook websites worldwide, making it easier for them to communicate.
      Please take those sites down too.

      Sincerely,

      Killjoy_NL

      The only slight difference being that the phonebook contains the same ratio of innocent people to guilty people as society, a torrent site specialising in exchanging illegally copied movies does not. Also, a phone book does not list next to each name the particular crime that individual specialises in, a torrent site lists each illegally posted movie next to the persons name you can download it from.

      Torrent sites like the one in question exist to facilitate the illegal exchanging of files. If you think this

  • by ArsenneLupin (766289) on Thursday June 09, 2011 @04:32AM (#36385076)
    Kino.to goes down, welcome kino.so ! In any case, that domain would be more fitting for pirates.
  • Summary incomplete (Score:5, Interesting)

    by aepervius (535155) on Thursday June 09, 2011 @04:36AM (#36385094)
    "Kino.to hosted no illicit content itself, but indexed material stored on file-hosters and other streaming services."

    Copying and pasting the first paragraphn is 1) misleading 2) an extremely poor way to do a SUMMARY. This is what is missing "GVU states that Kino.to was working closely with the sites that hosted the copyrighted films, and that they profited from commercial partnerships with these companies."

    So it was not a SIMPLE linking as the first paragraph make seem to believe.
    • by C0R1D4N (970153)

      "Kino.to hosted no illicit content itself, but indexed material stored on file-hosters and other streaming services." Copying and pasting the first paragraphn is 1) misleading 2) an extremely poor way to do a SUMMARY. This is what is missing "GVU states that Kino.to was working closely with the sites that hosted the copyrighted films, and that they profited from commercial partnerships with these companies." So it was not a SIMPLE linking as the first paragraph make seem to believe.

      Even still, why not go after those sites that hosted the films instead?

      • by PerformanceDude (1798324) on Thursday June 09, 2011 @05:04AM (#36385256)

        "Kino.to hosted no illicit content itself, but indexed material stored on file-hosters and other streaming services." Copying and pasting the first paragraphn is 1) misleading 2) an extremely poor way to do a SUMMARY. This is what is missing "GVU states that Kino.to was working closely with the sites that hosted the copyrighted films, and that they profited from commercial partnerships with these companies." So it was not a SIMPLE linking as the first paragraph make seem to believe.

        Even still, why not go after those sites that hosted the films instead?

        Because in Russia films host you... No seriously - it is obvious that those sites are in "uncooperative" jurisdictions. So they go for the closer target to get some press. Kino.ru/so/ir/kp will likely be available any day now.

        • by ezzzD55J (697465)

          So they go for the closer target to get some press. Kino.ru/so/ir/kp will likely be available any day now.

          Ok, but law did the 'closer target' break? It's just that if there wasn't a good legal case, there's no good legal reason the police couldn't come and raid my home either, even if I'm not breaking any law. So that makes me feel some empathy with the raidees, making millions doing shady stuff or not.

      • by bemymonkey (1244086) on Thursday June 09, 2011 @05:16AM (#36385320)

        They did... according to most German tech sites, the same people who owned the file hosting sites also happened to be the owners of kino.to. Or something like that...

        Anyway, they took the hosting sites down too.

    • Also, kino.to was making literally millions from advertisement. Euro-millions.

      If they hadn't, they wouldn't be prosecuted.

      Also, the police did not threaten to charge any leechers/downloaders, only uploaders.

      This is sane.

      • by Taco Cowboy (5327)

        Sane?

        Big brother is sane?

        • Upholding the law is sane.

          The law itself may not be sane in some places, due to the real world changing over time.

      • by gweihir (88907)

        Also, kino.to was making literally millions from advertisement. Euro-millions.

        If they hadn't, they wouldn't be prosecuted.

        Also, the police did not threaten to charge any leechers/downloaders, only uploaders.

        This is sane.

        It is actually unclear whether this is illegal. For example, Sharereactor was taken down when it started to ask for donations. But there never was a conviction, although that was kept pretty quiet. Now, Swiss law is a bit different, and there are incompetent and arrogant judges here, but they typically do not get away with it in the long run, hence no conviction. The thing is that as soon as there is a financial angle, it is a commercial enterprise and the rules on commercial misconduct are a lot stricter t

      • by laron (102608)

        "Also, kino.to was making literally millions from advertisement."
        Strange, that the movie industry ignores the opportunity to do the same.

        • by tibit (1762298)

          You have a point. I remember how hard was it to get Microsoft's development tools in Poland in the 90s. Things such as driver development kits, early "Visual" langauges, MSDN content were available within 45 minutes from the local pirates -- that's about as long as it took to copy things, or, later, burn them to CDs. Getting the same from local Microsoft reps/offices was a multiweek bureaucratic hurdle, even if you had money in your hand and were willing to pay right then and there. To be frank, Microsoft o

    • by think_nix (1467471) on Thursday June 09, 2011 @05:16AM (#36385324)

      Copying and pasting the first paragraphn is 1) misleading 2) an extremely poor way to do a SUMMARY. This is what is missing "GVU states that Kino.to was working closely with the sites that hosted the copyrighted films, and that they profited from commercial partnerships with these companies."

      So it was not a SIMPLE linking as the first paragraph make seem to believe.

      Good point. Also stated in these articles here: (sorry could not find anything in english) http://heise.de/-1257486/ [heise.de] and http://www.spiegel.de/netzwelt/netzpolitik/0,1518,767375,00.html/ [spiegel.de]

      Basically what was stated is that not only was kino.to taken down but also the filehosting and portal sites behind it. The people running these sites (kino.to and others) are not explicitly being charged for linking copyrighted material(ASFAIK this is still somewhat of a grayzone in Germany) But rather for building an organized criminal organization. If prosecuted in a German criminal court this could lead to a 5 year jail sentence.

    • by gweihir (88907)

      An that is where "founding a criminal organization" comes in. Without the commercial gain from working with the ones offering actual infringing content, the prosecutor has nothing. With that gain, the case becomes direct profit ("direct" because of the close collaboration) from copyright infringement, that becomes "commercial copyright infringement" and since this was multi-person and organized, it becomes "founding a criminal organization". There are serious penalties for that.

  • Of all places.... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 09, 2011 @04:45AM (#36385134)

    a title using "pirates" for copyright infringers. I'd actually be interesting in a massive police operation against gunships carrying armed pirates off the coast of Belgium. Until then....

    • by Shrike82 (1471633)
      Not this crap again. Pirate has very obviously become an accepted term for someone who infringes copyright. Why is this tired and meaningless argument that " a pirate has a boat and a wooden leg" trotted out again and again? It's language; fluid and changing. If we're going to bash copyright activist groups for being so stuck in their ways and unwilling to adapt, why can't everyone just accept that pirate now relates also to copyright infringers?
    • by RobotRunAmok (595286) on Thursday June 09, 2011 @08:39AM (#36386562)

      The "Waah Waah Content Pirates aren't Pirates, they don't have ships or parrots!" whine is even more tedious than the "Hackers are computer hobbyists, and not necessarily bad!" screed.

      Language evolves (c.f., the original meaning of "geek" in the subject here).

      I first heard the use of the word "pirate" in this modern context to refer to the people who were stealing satellite signals from premium cable TV networks back in the '70s, pre-dating popular Internet usage by around 15 years. Get over yourselves and move on.

    • by westlake (615356)

      a title using "pirates" for copyright infringers

      The usage was current while the Black Flag still flew over the Caribbean.

      --- and for so long as the geek frequents and publicizes sites like The Pirate Bay that isn't going to change.

  • by zaibazu (976612) on Thursday June 09, 2011 @04:46AM (#36385144)
    The site was well known for fake videoplayer plugins that lured unaware users into useless subscriptions.
  • by sourcerror (1718066) on Thursday June 09, 2011 @04:47AM (#36385152)

    More than a dozen people connected to the site were arrested after police officers in Germany, Spain, France and the Netherlands raided several residential addresses and data centers.

    Spain has a tax on empty CDs/DVDs. Wasn't the justification for that to be that it would make non-profit piracy tolerated? (In my country, Hungary we have a similar tax, and it protects users of pirate sites.) This is the first time I hear that users of pirate sites are also prosecuted in Europe. What next, bittorrent users? (Like with Hurt Locker in US.)

    • by nospam007 (722110) *

      Is it a crime in Tonga, (Kino.to) to list alleged 'copyright infringing' sites?
      How do I know that streaming an English movie from Kazakhstan or Burkina Faso is illegal if nobody can find out who owns the rights to stream those movies in/from those countries?
      If it's intellectual 'Property', could those countries tax that property, if, or even if they don't put it in the theaters there?

      If they want worldwide rights, they should pay taxes on that property worldwide.

    • by Opportunist (166417) on Thursday June 09, 2011 @06:53AM (#36385834)

      We got that joke running here as well (as do most countries afaik). The gag in it all is the combination of various little bits that make the whole "media tax" very fishy.

      1. Allegedly, the reason for that levy on blank media is that you, the consumer, will use them to record copyrighted material, e.g. by making a copy of a record on a blank tape, or in today's word, a copy of the DVD that you borrowed from a friend. Our law even has a section that explicitly allows you to borrow legally bought media from personal friends (nobody on the internet is your friend, btw, that's established in court, so any internet sources are not part of the deal) and create a copy of it for your personal use.

      2. Every single commercial DVD and BluRay (that would be subject to the grounds established in the first bullet point) now comes with copy protection.

      3. The law now explicitly also disallows circumventing protection of any sort.

      Question for 100: How am I supposed to execute my right to a copy if copy protection prevents me from copying and I must not disable this protection (even if it's trivial)?

      • I'd like to start off my reply by saying that although you group together a bunch of countries that share in common a levy on recordable media, the details can differ hugely between those countries.

        For example, in point 1 you mention that "nobody on the internet is your friend, so any internet sources are not part of the deal". This, however, does not apply to The Netherlands where it is - for now - completely legal to download music, video and movies even if the rights holders have not given you explicit

      • by SimonInOz (579741)

        The problem is simple. It costs USD200,000,000 to make a movie, right? (Ok, that's an expensive one - but what the heck, I like expensive ones).

        Now, a fair number of movies are flops - and it's hard to predict this in advance.

        So the studio needs to earn an awful lot of money from the good ones to stay in business (and we all want the movies to get made, right?)

        How do you do it? If everyone downloads the movie for free, then the studio goes broke and doesn't make any more movies. Or do you want everyone else

        • Erh... what's that got to do with the levy on media to compensate for copies that must not be created?

          The original statement for the reason why that levy exists was that it is legal to record from radio and TV, and that it is also legal (in my country) to create copies of content someone bought for a personal friend. If this is pretty much outlawed by including copy protection on all media and creating a law at the same time that outlaws circumventing copy protection, no matter whether it actually protects

    • There are two fallacies here that need to be addressed:
        - According to TFA, the site was making significant profits, so this is not a case of non-profit IP infringement.
        - Users of the site have not been targeted. It was the operators and/or administrators of the site that have been arrested.

  • Although the site was most popular in German-speaking countries, it didnâ(TM)t escape the eye of the MPAA either.

    Unfortunately, I'm not in a German speaking country.
    Can any foreign /.ers tell us what sites are biggest in their country's sphere of influence?

    • Couldn't you just google "David Hasselhoff" and see what sites turn up?

    • by arth1 (260657)

      Unfortunately, I'm not in a German speaking country.

      Neither am I - how is that a prerequisite for reading German?

      Anyhow, just use Google to translate, and if there are certain parts that don't make sense, ask about them. Don't be lazy and expect people here to do a full translation for you.

  • Cool... so (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 09, 2011 @05:07AM (#36385274)

    Does this mean we now have official sites where we can stream / download movies in decent formats for reasonable cost? Like DivX sites operating in a erm... unofficial capacity under DMCA safe harbour provisions. These are reasonably anonymous with user uploaded content and a good selection of obscure / hard to find stufff.

    AFAIK there's not a single legitimate video site that would satisfy my criteria and even youtube is operating in a grey area. Nobody wants to see compulsory licensing introduced as a result of market failure. Copyright may be a form of monopoly but there's no reason rights holders should be exempt from market forces.

    • Mod parent up,please!

      I have money right now and would definitely pay for watching movies but in my country there is absolutely no working legal movie streaming site with decent choices. It's completely ridiculous.

    • Re:Cool... so (Score:4, Informative)

      by Opportunist (166417) on Thursday June 09, 2011 @07:02AM (#36385900)

      Can someone who didn't post yet hand that guy a few mod points? This is pretty much dead on the problem.

      I have money and I would gladly spend it on content. If it was offered to me, and offered in an acceptable way.

      It takes AGES (years, literally) before a new season of whatever show I'd like to watch gets available in my country. Of course, dubbing and all takes time, but I'd be happy to have it in plain ol' English. And not only because the dubbing stinks for 9 out of 10 shows, where jokes get mutilated to the point where you can't even understand why it was supposedly funny. We're at least one-two seasons behind on our networks. Writer's guild strike? Some actor going bonkers? We won't feel it at least another year or two, and by then they certainly compensated with something. Hey, what a blast!

      Then there's my pet peeve about anime. Some of the dubbing is just atrocious if you understand at least a few words of Japanese. They often get butchered with cuts that change the whole story, not to mention that certain animes won't ever make it here since, hey, comics are for kids and these things aren't suitable for our kids! Think I'll ever get to see a German dub of Hellsing OVA? Doubt it. Not only 'cause of the Nazis.

      So let me buy what I want to have and I'll gladly throw my money at you! But please refrain from casting it in a package that I cannot accept as a licensee. If you force me to sit through half an hour of unskipable ads, I'm not going to buy. I paid for the content! If you want to litter it with ads, show it to me for free on private TV!

    • by metacell (523607)

      There's a service called Voddler which streams legally licensed films and TV shows over BitTorrent, but the content is still very meager compared to a pirate site.

  • by Stormtrooper42 (1850242) on Thursday June 09, 2011 @05:10AM (#36385290)

    police have arrested a total of 13 people thus far. A 14th person is still being hunted.

    13 people. How massive.

    • Re: (Score:2, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward

      It was a massive effort (as in tax euros wasted), not necessarily a massive success.

  • just shut all down (Score:5, Insightful)

    by devent (1627873) on Thursday June 09, 2011 @05:19AM (#36385346) Homepage

    I really wish they would shut down every site out there that illegal links or shares copyrighted material, so that people have no way at all anymore to download movies and music. Then I would see the whole movie and music industry go in to oblivion because nobody will buy there crap anymore.

    Are they really believing that if people couldn't share the movies and music, the people would suddenly buy more stuff? If anything, they would buy less stuff because they don't know anymore new artists or new movies.

    As I was 18 I used a lot torrents, and I mean a lot. Like 5 movies and games every week. Now I don't use that anymore, do I buy more movies and more games? No, not at all. Why? Because that crap is just so expensive and I found so many new alternatives for entertainment. Like youtube where I watch news and starcraft 2 movies, and southparkstudios.com, and collegehumour.com. And I read a lot of blogs and news on the internet. For music I have youtube and lastfm and other services.

    If I go to the Mediamarkt I see it why I stopped to buy new movies or music and why others are not buying, too. I see it because all the DVDs and all the music CDs are laying there around for years and nobody touches them. Because they are so freaky expensive. 20Euro for a old DVD movie, 30Euro and more for new movies and 30Euro and more for TV series.

    Every time I go to the shop and see a nice movie, I see the price and I think: do I really want that DVD for that price? And the answer is every time: no, because it's just too expensive for just one movie that I will watch one day and then it will lay around collecting dust. If the DVDs would be like 5Euro each for new movies and under 5Euro for old DVDs I would buy them. But not for that price, no way. Because I have so much free entertainment.

    • by samjam (256347)

      At ASDA DVD's are £5 a throw and often less.

      I buy them and watch them once or twice and think I've had good value for money.

      • The last few DVD i got didn't play on any of my 3 computers or the DVD player. They refused to give me a refund.
        • by samjam (256347)

          Sometimes it's easier to get them to agree for an exchange.

          Quite possibly when they get to the shelf they won't find any if your friend has them all in his trolly as he walks around frozen veg.

          Having already accepted the point, they then give the refund or a credit note or 3 "smiles" or something and your friend can put them back before he leaves.

          But I agree, quality and customer service at ASDA are going to hell.

    • by Kjella (173770) on Thursday June 09, 2011 @06:31AM (#36385728) Homepage

      I really wish they would shut down every site out there that illegal links or shares copyrighted material, so that people have no way at all anymore to download movies and music. Then I would see the whole movie and music industry go in to oblivion because nobody will buy there crap anymore.

      Yeah, because it was all going to oblivion before the Internet and P2P, right?

      As I was 18 I used a lot torrents, and I mean a lot. Like 5 movies and games every week. Now I don't use that anymore, do I buy more movies and more games? No, not at all. Why? Because that crap is just so expensive and I found so many new alternatives for entertainment. Like youtube where I watch news and starcraft 2 movies, and southparkstudios.com, and collegehumour.com. And I read a lot of blogs and news on the internet. For music I have youtube and lastfm and other services.

      Good for you. But everyone else, why are they then downloading all the TV series and movies? Oh, because they actually want them not the youtube garbage. This is the old "I don't like them so neither should you".

      Every time I go to the shop and see a nice movie, I see the price and I think: do I really want that DVD for that price? And the answer is every time: no, because it's just too expensive for just one movie that I will watch one day and then it will lay around collecting dust. If the DVDs would be like 5Euro each for new movies and under 5Euro for old DVDs I would buy them. But not for that price, no way

      Every time they offer something for X$, there's someone who comes along and says "If only it was available for X/2$ I'd buy it. But if you actually lowered it, most of them would now say X/4$. Or X/8$. Reality is that we know the truth, those who really liked it already bought it at the high price and those who don't will find some other excuse not to buy it.

      I don't mind copyright as such when I buy say a paperback book. The author wrote it, whatever deals good or bad he did with the publisher is not my problem, and he charges a price per copy. I buy my copy and that copy is mine, end of story. No DRM, no regions, no EULA, no licensed player that won't let me flip several pages at once (no fast forward), no disappearing ink pages that'll be gone if I resell it (one-time codes), I can sell it, burn it, make paper planes of it and it's a straight deal in every way except for the few limited rights actually in copyright law.

      The problem is copyright enforcement which has turned into a huge inconvenience for the customers and is also threatening lots of privacy, due process and other laws. I don't want companies sitting on remote disable/delete buttons to everything I own. Of course you might say I should become a cultural hermit and just reject all commercial TV, movies etc. but I'd rather just take it while I wait for them to clue in and provide a service equal to the torrent sites - at any cost. I do buy the best on BluRay/DVD as the DRM is broken, but they go mostly unopened as I've already had my "digital delivery" long ago.

      • Every time they offer something for X$, there's someone who comes along and says "If only it was available for X/2$ I'd buy it. But if you actually lowered it, most of them would now say X/4$. Or X/8$. Reality is that we know the truth, those who really liked it already bought it at the high price and those who don't will find some other excuse not to buy it.

        You see, a few years back, there was a huge price difference between the country where I was living (Luxembourg) and the country where I currently live (Germany). The content was identical, only the packaging differed (slightly)... I actually MD5'd discs to check. Now, how can the content industry justify an up to 300% markup on identical product between two neighboring countries? A TV series boxed set was 35 in Germany and 100+ in Luxembourg. In my first year in Germany, I bought way more content than the

      • by drinkypoo (153816)

        I think it's really true that the value of hard copy media has gone down. For those of us with access to Netflix streaming there's a vast library of relatively high-quality content available with relatively little trouble. Any more I will only buy deeply discounted DVDs. Most of my recent DVD purchases have been very old movies I got used on DVD at yard sales. It's probably been more than a year since I bought anything new on disc. The last thing I did buy new on disc was a box set that turned out to be an

    • by sgt scrub (869860)

      Not to mention if you buy a discount DVD they are usually filled with advertisements. Rip'd movies allow you to stream a list of .avi files to a player or just start the file. You get to enjoy the movie without all of the annoyance of the DVD interface, adverts, warnings, and promo's.

  • Dear retarded goverments please stop wasting more resources on hunting down people who cost corporations money and put it into, I don't know, maybe hospitals, schools, scientific research. You know, things that actually matter...
  • by mihamicka (2135636) on Thursday June 09, 2011 @06:00AM (#36385564)
    WTF is wrong with the Police? WTF is wrong with this world?.. Police makes this "great" arrests instead of arresting the drug dealers and murderers and many other shits from the streets? OMG..... what world we live in? A world dominated by money? a world where even arrests are made cos some rich ppl who make some movies ask that? WTF? If the movies would no be so expensive probably a site like kino.to would not be needed.... but it is... and all this shit will only bring rage and need for revenge to many ppl including me.. I feel like we all start to live in Ceausescu time... where somebody was "managing" to copy some anti-communist book.. and ppl was giving that book from hand to hand, in secret, to be rad by everybody.... is same shit that so called "movie industry" does.... this reminds me of another article i rad here some time ago.. about some police in Australia who arrested a journalist for writing an article about how to hack computers using Facebook... after a friend's computer was hacked that way... same shit... WTF... police does not work on itself anymore... they work for the ones who pay better? oh and as far as i remember: we, all of us pay the police to be fair... we pay their salaries by paying taxes... WTH?
    • by gweihir (88907)

      Even when they arrest scumbags, the news is not to be trusted. The great European child porn raids of the past came down to basically nothing. If I remember correctly, they got less than 100 convictions for >1000 people raided, because most were actually innocent. The press still reported the high number and that is what the police seemingly was really after.

    • Police makes this "great" arrests instead of arresting the drug dealers and murderers

      So we are supposed to believe that by virtue of selling drugs, someone must be a bad person? Obviously selling drugs makes you worse than violating copyrights, and puts you on the same level as a murderer, right?

  • The word "pirate" has been hijacked from the meaning of robbing ships at sea using violent threat to meaning copying a CD. This hijacking is convenient to the record industry, but I object to its use here. I do think that robbing ships at sea using violent threats is wrong.
    • by Opportunist (166417) on Thursday June 09, 2011 @07:10AM (#36385946)

      So what? Everybody committing a crime against a government is suddenly a terrorist. Inflation doesn't just affect money.

    • by Mascot (120795)

      I don't really see a problem. The word has several meanings. Robbing ships, copyright infringement, trademark infringement (counterfeit apparel). It pretty much boils down to 1) Robbing ships and 2) Everything else.

      What I'm getting at is that there isn't really a lot of room for confusion when used in context. Nobody's going to think you boarded a ship if you "bought a pair of pirate Nike shoes", or "pirated Angry Birds". A lot of people won't even think of the pirates of old (the salty kind) if you mention

    • by EvilIdler (21087)

      Wikipedia (yes, I know) points to this 1603 reference to "word-pirates":
      http://www.luminarium.org/renascence-editions/yeare.html [luminarium.org]

      400 years if you count that non-pillaging use, 300 or so if you count the US copyright law (second reference in that Wikipedia article on copyright infringement).

      The pirates arrested were guilty of piracy in that sense: organised copying and redistribution for profit. Piracy is a fine word. What I'm opposed to is people being labelled pirates for just copying movies to watch, if th

  • The reasoning (Score:5, Insightful)

    by dnaumov (453672) on Thursday June 09, 2011 @06:13AM (#36385642)

    Every now and then, someone tries to argue that torrent trackers are supposedly invinsible because they don't outright host copyrighted content, but only the .torrent files. I really wish people would start focusing on something else, because by now it should be blatantly obvious that such reasoning does not fly with the courts. In my country (Finland), there was a court case regarding Finreactor, a major finnish torrent tracker and the defendants tried to argue this very defence. It didn't fly. At all. The court concluded that the site was MOSTLY used to facilitate illegal activity and that the site maintainers made no reasonable effort to clean the site up from torrents pointing to copyrighted content. The tracker admins were found gulty and sentenced to heavy fines.

    No, this logic does not apply to Google, because Google is not used MOSTLY to facilitate illegal activity and no, this logic does not apply to gun manufacturers, because guns are mostly used by law enforcement and army and not to commit murder and robbery.

    • by metacell (523607)

      It does apply to selling distillation equipment to private persons, though. It's almost exclusively used for making spirits illegally.

    • The defense of torrents is still valid, but the courts are wrong. Without opposition repression will spread. Already in most countries the same corrupt legal theory that some legal things are also illegal has led to the criminalization of armed self-defense. Already Google has had to alter its website to block torrent suggestions, and governments are seizing unapproved websites. Copyright parasites are demanding royalties from Google, and are pressuring ISPs to filter connections.
  • Bad headline? (Score:4, Informative)

    by sirdude (578412) on Thursday June 09, 2011 @06:32AM (#36385738)
    Considering that this is /., the submitter's alias is "freedumb" and the linked article is on torrentfreak, isn't the headline rather poorly constructed? The torrentfreak article is titled "Kino.to Raided In Massive Police Operation, Admins Arrested" which is a lot more accurate.
  • by master_p (608214) on Thursday June 09, 2011 @07:08AM (#36385938)

    ...other cases, like corrupted politicians, cartels, drug and people trafficking, the world would be a much better place.

  • by gweihir (88907) on Thursday June 09, 2011 @07:11AM (#36385948)

    It is quite possible that at least the ones arrested in Germany will walk free. Currently it is unclear whether linking and indexing even can constitute a crime. It is however unlikely that in that case the state would have to compensate them for lost business, as the business is somewhat amoral, which is a factor in civil law. (Prostitution is legal in Germany, before you ask.)

    My guess: Police hoping to make big positive headlines (which they have), but the case will collapse.

  • by pinkushun (1467193) * on Thursday June 09, 2011 @07:43AM (#36386142) Journal

    Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also a prison. -- Henry David Thoreau

    We constantly hear about how piracy is a crime, but how on earth did the entertainment industry manage to lobby this so high up that it gained such prominent elevation in the police force?

  • by AtlantaSteve (965777) on Thursday June 09, 2011 @07:57AM (#36386236)
    THIS IS THE GREATEST EXAMPLE OF HYPERBOLE ON SLASHDOT EVER!!!!!

    But seriously... customs officials at any of the world's borders make bigger busts than this all the time, for trafficking actual physical goods. For that matter, taking out a single Somali rowboat would be a bigger "piracy bust" than this.

    Lame, editors.
  • For a moment there, I thought they'd actually busted some Somalian pirates - you know, the people who actually steal ships and kill people.

    But no, it's just a few people who make copies of stuff.

A rock store eventually closed down; they were taking too much for granite.

Working...