Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

ThePirateBay Will Rise Again?

Posted by Zonk on Thu Jun 01, 2006 08:31 AM
from the can't-keep-a-good-torrent-down dept.
muffen writes "IDG.se has an interesting article up giving more details about the raid on PirateBay, and a little history of the organization. The news organ reports that nearly 200 servers were taken, and many of them had nothing to do with the torrent-serving group. After yesterday's raid, the site is back up with a single page explaining the situation. Brokep, one of the people behind PirateBay, claims that the site will be up and running within a couple of days. He also says that there is no legal basis for the raid against them and that he is certain that the case will not go to trial." From the site: "The necessity for securing technical evidence for the existence of a web-service which is fully official, the legality of which has been under public debate for years and whose principals are public persons giving regular press interviews, could not be explained. Asked for other reasoning behind the choice to take down a site, without knowing whether it is illegal or not, the officers explained that this is normal."

Related Stories

[+] ThePirateBay.org Raided and Shut Down 1189 comments
An anonymous reader writes "ThePirateBay.org, a longtime fixture of the BitTorrent community, is currently under investigation. Slyck.com is reporting their servers have been seized by the Swedish police." What's really interesting about them is the strange political power that they held in their homeland. There was much discussion even of a political party. This will be interesting to watch unfold.
Offsite: BBC Coverage
[+] Pirates, Web 2.0, and Hundred Dollar Laptop 339 comments
A few quick updates on some recent Slashdot stories in Slashback tonight. We have some additional information on the ever-interesting hundred-dollar laptop, the ongoing flap over the trademarking of 'Web 2.0' for conferences, and the shutdown of the Pirate Bay site. Read on for details.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold:
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • Cross Link & Clickies (Score:5, Informative)

    I know that yesterday's article [slashdot.org] is most likely linked above but I would like to point out Christian Engström's post [slashdot.org] (the vice chairman of the Piratpartiet) which was in reply to my own post [slashdot.org].

    I myself live in America and the only way I can find information on this political party is online. I wish that there were more official resources in English aside from their site [piratpartiet.se]. There seems to be one page with the content exactly the same as Christian Engström's post.

    Is it possible that this party is popular via lack of information? I would like to see them explain their strategy & give very detailed specifics about what they would like to see changed and why. I think that if this was posted, it may cause them to lose some support but would definitely let Sweden & the rest of the world know a lot more about the Pirate Party. I like their desired end results but how to plan to achieve these goals?

    I don't want to sound like an ass but in my opinion, having 200 servers of a controversial party raided and confiscated by the local government is one of the best things that could happen to said party. Especially since nothing incriminating was found on them. Do political parties now earn "street cred" like this? Certainly would strike a chord with the youth & idealists.
    Asked for other reasoning behind the choice to take down a site, without knowing whether it is illegal or not, the officers explained that this is normal.
    Hmmm, sounds like pretty unlawful search and seize action ...

    Dennis: Come and see the corruption inherent in the system. Help! Help! I'm being repressed!
    King Arthur: *seizes the servers* Bloody file sharers!
    Dennis: Oh, what a giveaway! Did you hear that? Did you hear that, eh? That's what I'm on about! Did you see him repressing me? You saw him, Didn't you?
    • Re:Cross Link & Clickies (Score:4, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 01 2006, @08:41AM (#15444148)

      Popular via lack of information? It's a Swedish party, for Swedes. If you can't read Swedish, you probably won't be able to vote for them either.

      And that's the way it is. There's plenty of information there, but it's in Swedish.

      [ Parent ]
    • Re:Cross Link & Clickies (Score:5, Interesting)

      by psergiu (67614) on Thursday June 01 2006, @08:50AM (#15444234)
      We would very much like such a party in Romania. It would be hugely popular in the wake of the lastest events: In order to please the EU, the police concluded that all computers connected to local unregistered LANs are used for hosting/trading illegal software/movies/mp3s and began breaking the doors and seizing the computers of anyone not connected to the Cable operators who "sponsored" this operation.
      Link Here [gardianul.ro] (in romanian - but the picture is worth a thousands words)
      The jail term for software piracy in romania is up to 15 years (more than rape) and in a few days the police arrested almost 100 people for this - with the only proof being an IP address.
      [ Parent ]
      • Re:Cross Link & Clickies (Score:4, Informative)

        by ozamosi (615254) on Thursday June 01 2006, @09:14AM (#15444469)
        (http://flukkost.nu/blog/)
        The Piracy Party has stated that one of their goals is to get into EU, and to get there, they want to help out starting Piracy Parties all over Europe. So you (or other persons interested) should probably contact them if you want to start one in your country.
        [ Parent ]
      • Translation, please - ! by catman (Score:2) Thursday June 01 2006, @09:30AM
        • Re:Translation, please - ! (Score:5, Informative)

          by tibike77 (611880) <tibikegamez@@@yahoo...com> on Thursday June 01 2006, @10:57AM (#15445661)
          (Last Journal: Friday November 10 2006, @06:20AM)
          I could translate that, but it would take a long while. So I'm just going to (loosely) translate (some of) the relevant paragraphs... even by Romanian standards, that article is pretty shabby in legalese and IT-term-wise anyway.
          If it sounds strange to you, don't worry, that's what they actually wrote.

          They are targetting LAN DC++ users (and LAN hubs) right now.
          It is unknown wether they will extend this to torrent users of well-known ISPs or not.
          ___

          The following is the translation of the bolded text in the article:

          A hysteria broke all across the country following operations directed towards those who illegally use the "share" option in the so-called neighbourhood networks (translator note: LANs spanning users from a few buildings up to a few city blocks). Sources from the MAI (translator note: Ministry of Internal Affairs ? well, the police anyway) have declared the operation is code-named "The Gramophone".

          Because in the IP-rights category Romania got a "yellow flag" warning from the EU, Romanian Police has enacted measures regarding weekly raids organisation in order to control this phenomenon, in all counties.

          Within the scope of this endeavour, policemen and prosecutors will work together with ISPs and hub operators. Another method used by the cops to penetrate the hubs is by assuming innocuous user identities.

          In Iasi (translator note: rather large city, "capital" of the county with the same name in the NE of the country, region called Moldova), cops and prosecutors have made several household searches, seizing HDDs, computers and switches. In Tulcea (translator note: city by the Black Sea coast/ Danube Delta), over 20 Internet users have ended up with penal records, and cops have confiscated "dozens" of HDDs.

          The chief of the IP department from the "Parchetul General" (translator note: the higher prosecuting autority), Monica Otava, has declared that prosecutors all across the country will start [such] actions, benefitting from both legal grounds and the necessary logistics for the "annihilation" of LANs.

          The only other relevant (and worying) bit is the following:

          "- Sa inteleg ca de-acum incolo orice utilizator dintr-o asa-zisa retea de cartier se poate trezi la usa cu un procuror cu un mandat de perchezitie in mana?
          - Da, oricand, se poate trezi la usa cu un mandat de perchezitie."


          That loosely translates into something like this:

          *Interviewer* : So, are we to understand that from now on anybody who is connected to a local LAN can end up with the police holding a search warrant at their door?
          *Monica Otava* : Yes, anytime, he can end up with a search warrant at his door

          Well... no comment.
          [ Parent ]
      • Re:Cross Link & Clickies by magetoo (Score:1) Thursday June 01 2006, @11:38AM
      • Re:Cross Link & Clickies by evil_Tak (Score:1) Thursday June 01 2006, @01:05PM
      • Re:Cross Link & Clickies by Owy (Score:1) Thursday June 01 2006, @03:23PM
      • Re:Cross Link & Clickies by Zaatxe (Score:1) Thursday June 01 2006, @05:52PM
      • Re:Cross Link & Clickies by The Cydonian (Score:2) Friday June 02 2006, @02:30AM
      • Re:Cross Link & Clickies by interlingua.ro (Score:3) Thursday June 01 2006, @11:31AM
      • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
    • The the pirate party? by Anonymous Coward (Score:1) Thursday June 01 2006, @09:03AM
      • Good luck (Score:4, Funny)

        by LunaticTippy (872397) on Thursday June 01 2006, @10:09AM (#15445085)
        There are countless signs in Los Angeles referring to "The La Brea Tar Pits."

        Or, as anyone who knows a smidge of Spanish calls them, "The The Tar Tar Pits."

        [ Parent ]
        • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
      • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
    • Re:Cross Link & Clickies by udoschuermann (Score:1) Thursday June 01 2006, @09:04AM
    • Re:Cross Link & Clickies (Score:5, Informative)

      by Oldsmobile (930596) on Thursday June 01 2006, @09:06AM (#15444398)
      (Last Journal: Friday June 01, @05:25PM)
      "Hmmm, sounds like pretty unlawful search and seize action ... "

      Though I am not an expert on Swedish law, I doubt there was anythign exactly illegal in this operation, though it was obviously heavy handed. European law works quite differently compared to US law, so any comparisons are useless.

      If there was no reason for this seizure, of course compensation will be paid and if the evidence used to justify it was flawed or faked or the wrong kind, senior police officers may or may not face disiplinary action.

      Of course, the police in Sweden have been caught lying and faking evidence before, such as when covering their backs after shooting someone (who was unarmed) in Gothernburg during a demonstration there a few years back.

      I'm not sure how that ended up.

      [ Parent ]
    • Re:Cross Link & Clickies by extintor (Score:1) Thursday June 01 2006, @10:09AM
    • Re:Cross Link & Clickies by nilenico (Score:3) Thursday June 01 2006, @12:52PM
    • PRIATE BAY IS BACK UP!!! by sternone (Score:1) Saturday June 03 2006, @03:21AM
    • the illegal drugs... by zogger (Score:1) Thursday June 01 2006, @10:03AM
      • Re:the illegal drugs... by lgw (Score:2) Thursday June 01 2006, @12:52PM
        • you are SO wrong (Score:5, Insightful)

          by zogger (617870) on Thursday June 01 2006, @01:54PM (#15447515)
          (http://technocrat.net/ | Last Journal: Saturday November 10, @06:08PM)
          You are automatically equating protest with the word disruptive. Look what you have written. This alone proves you have little idea what you are talking about, nor have you been paying attention to the long past history of political "protesting". And before the knee jerk denial that you said that, look what you wrote.

          I have personally witnessed this violation of rights BS and been the target of cops at *completely* peaceful protests where they went apeshit under some orders and attacked the crowd, going back to civil rights days, pre-anti nam war days, and from then onwards. Not to say violent protests don't happen as well, I won't deny that, but by no means are they all, most usually at least start out peaceful until the overt or covert(yes, this happens) functionaires start the violence, giving them the excuse to go nuts. I have seen it too many times now to not know this isn't SOP with them.

          It does no good if you can't assemble where the action is, 10 miles down the road behind a fence is not "the right to assemble",the government has placed illegal and unconstitutional restrictions on a right, they have said you need "permission" to exercise a born-with right. This is illegal. That right no where states you have the right to assemble where THEY tell you to assemble. That's something they just started doing because they got the guns and follow orders from their "superior beings" whomever those entities are.

          "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."

          It does not state you have "some" rights to assemble or that you can only assemble in some designated "zone". Show us where it says that, I have provided the full quote. If you can, I'll concede gracefully, but I have read that numerous times in my life, and can't seem to see those little clauses you insist are there. If it is public property, you have a right to assemble there (obviously personal private property is a different subject entirely), you have the right to your speech, and the right to be heard with your petitions, whether the petitions are oral, written, or visual, as petitions could take any or all of those forms. We the people have a right to tell our elected folks what we think about what is going on. Period. If they keep trying to dodge the petition, they are violating their duties as elected people, no matter what media form the petition is in. They can't refuse the petition. They can't legally order their mercenaries to keep you away from them when you are trying to deliver your petition to them, but they constantly do that. I know why of course, it's because by and large they are mostly corrupt crooks and want to keep their cushy well paying jobs and positions of "rule" over people.

          If you got a political beef, you and your peers have a right to assemble, and to petition the government. That's it, it is that simple ancd clearly the intent of the founders. they were just coming from a time where the redcoats broke up crowds, told them they couldn't be in the town square in a group, arrested "ring leaders' for their "speech", kept them from "petitioning" the crown's authorities, etc, that's why the amendment was written exactly like that. It is beyond clear. They do NOT have the right to restrict you in such a way that they are dodging their duties as governmental workers/politicans/or functionaires, they are REQUIRED to listen to your petitions as acceptance of their official office, to follow the laws. Yes, they have to listen. They still might not agree with your petition, but they have a duty that goes with their oath. And if you come in a group, to show solidarity and the numbers,i.e., an assemblage, too bad, that is a free persons right.

          They are NOT RULERS, we are NOT SUBJECTS, much as they and apparently you seem to believ
          [ Parent ]
        • Re:the illegal drugs... by popeguilty (Score:1) Thursday June 01 2006, @02:49PM
    • Re:Cross Link & Clickies by Anonymous Coward (Score:1) Thursday June 01 2006, @10:54AM
    • 4 replies beneath your current threshold.
  • This looks like a job for Captain Copyright! [captaincopyright.ca]

    Seriously - of course the pirate bay will rise again - what they were doing was not illegal under Swedish law.
  • This is bad... (Score:5, Funny)

    by Quintios (594318) on Thursday June 01 2006, @08:33AM (#15444077)
    (Last Journal: Tuesday June 06 2006, @11:38PM)
    I think the selling of Pirates is bad. The site should stay down!
  • We can all freely download all those shows and movies and music and software produced by the companies represented by the RIAA and MPAA and BSA! We can continue this amazing paradox in which we bash the quality of their product while we spend exorbinent amounts of time and energy figuring out ways to get it quickly and freely!
  • "criminal police?" Oo (Score:5, Funny)

    by plasmacutter (901737) on Thursday June 01 2006, @08:40AM (#15444130)
    (Last Journal: Tuesday November 06, @02:39PM)
    from TFS: Swedish National Criminal Police

    the police are criminal?
    well at least in sweden they tell it like it is.. i guess Oo
  • Sounds familiar... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by gasmonso (929871) on Thursday June 01 2006, @08:44AM (#15444176)
    (http://religiousfreaks.com/)

    "...the site will be up and running within a couple of days" Hmmm, thought I heard that once when ShareReactor got raided a couple years ago.

    http://religiousfreaks.com/ [religiousfreaks.com]
  • They were ready (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 01 2006, @08:46AM (#15444194)
    Im sure the folks at TBP were totally prepared for this raid. Their hilarious abrasiveness in the face of criticism only angered and further instigated the detractors. I am confident this group had prepared statements, lawyers already ready for the case, and these guys knew exactly how to react.

    At least, I hope so.

    Best of luck to them
  • Don't make me ask (Score:3, Funny)

    by Fiznarp (233) on Thursday June 01 2006, @08:46AM (#15444196)
    The news organ reports

    Exactly where on the author's anatomy is this organ located?
  • MPAA (Score:5, Informative)

    by muffen (321442) on Thursday June 01 2006, @08:47AM (#15444200)
    The MPAA's statement after the takedown of thepiratebay. [mpaa.org]

    Seems like Swedish authorities gave in to the pressure from **AA groups. This may be good as it will put the general public on the side of TPB.

    A poll [aftonbladet.se] in the largest evening newspaper in sweden shows what people think of the takedown of TPB. The question in the poll is, is it right to "attack" people that are involved in filesharing. Ja = YES and Nej = NO. The results speak for themselves.
    • Re:MPAA by NeoSkandranon (Score:2) Thursday June 01 2006, @08:55AM
    • Re:MPAA by Overzeetop (Score:3) Thursday June 01 2006, @09:19AM
      • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
    • Re:MPAA by BetterThanCaesar (Score:3) Thursday June 01 2006, @09:21AM
    • Re:MPAA by milamber3 (Score:1) Thursday June 01 2006, @09:27AM
    • Re:MPAA by z0idberg (Score:1) Thursday June 01 2006, @09:46AM
    • Re:MPAA by retrosteve (Score:2) Thursday June 01 2006, @10:16AM
      • Re:MPAA by Petrushka (Score:2) Thursday June 01 2006, @06:14PM
    • MPAA Document title : (Score:5, Funny)

      by alexhs (877055) on Thursday June 01 2006, @10:27AM (#15445313)
      (http://dr-tools.sourceforge.net/ | Last Journal: Tuesday January 23 2007, @10:27AM)
      SWEDISH AUTHORITIES SINK PIRATE BAY

      Hmm... How are you going to sink a bay ? Isn't it already full of water ?
      [ Parent ]
    • Re:MPAA by thePowerOfGrayskull (Score:1) Thursday June 01 2006, @11:07AM
    • Is that libel actionable? by Mateo_LeFou (Score:2) Thursday June 01 2006, @12:43PM
    • Re:MPAA by wheany (Score:3) Thursday June 01 2006, @10:22AM
    • right ... but wrong. (Score:5, Informative)

      by hummassa (157160) on Thursday June 01 2006, @10:30AM (#15445354)
      (http://slashdot.org/~hummassa | Last Journal: Wednesday August 22, @05:11AM)
      RIGHT: Unauthorized redistribution of copyrighted works is in violation of the Berne Convention, which Sweden is a signatory,
      WRONG: so it IS illegal for Pirate Bay to do what they are doing.
      Pirate Bay was NOT, under no circumstances, authorizedly or unauthorizedly redistributing copyrighted works. There were NO copyrighted works in PB's servers. ".torrent" files are just files that contain the following information: "the tracker XXX is keeping files YYY, ZZZ, TTT available for bittorrent swarm downloading." And "contributory infringement" is NOT part of the Berne convention... it's an USofAn "innovation". BTW, down here in Brasil there is no "contributory infringement" either.
      [ Parent ]
    • Re:MPAA by retrosteve (Score:3) Thursday June 01 2006, @10:39AM
    • Re:MPAA by Suzumushi (Score:2) Thursday June 01 2006, @11:12AM
    • Re:MPAA by mkro (Score:2) Thursday June 01 2006, @11:33AM
    • Re:MPAA by trewornan (Score:2) Thursday June 01 2006, @05:57PM
    • 6 replies beneath your current threshold.
  • The Purpose of Copyright (Score:5, Insightful)

    by amoeba1911 (978485) on Thursday June 01 2006, @08:47AM (#15444211)
    (http://www.bitbar.org/)
    The media companies make it sound like copyright is a way of limiting your rights, but it was created with the intent of creating more diversity in content by limiting the rights of the content distributors (like MPAA). It used to have clauses which ensured the consumer's rights wouldn't be stifled (such as fair use). Why was copyright law created?? Because with the invention of the printing press things could be mass replicated much easier, the idea behind copyright was to limit who could print/sell stuff, taking power from printing press/distributor and giving it back to content creator, to allow people to create and distribute new content instead of letting the printing press have a field day selling us the same old crap making huge profits. Copyright law was created so that the content creator would be properly compensated. So that the consumer wouldn't be subjected to the same crap over and over again with no new works being created. The copyright law was made to protect the content creator and the content user. The copyright law was created to stifle the content distribution companies like MPAA, not the consumer. I don't know when this changed, but whoever had the wonderful idea of copyright would probably jam a sharp stick in his eyes if he saw what crud the content distributors have turned this law into. The copyright law has obviously failed in the past half a century and content distributors have too much power now. It's time for another copyright law with the original intent of protecting the consumer and the content creator and to make sure media conglomerates like MPAA don't make huge profits from nothing. There's no reason why a CD should cost $20 (and only a dime going to the creator) when the manufacturing cost of CD is in pennies... just my two cents. Sharing is caring. Let's try to put an end to the tyrannical misuse of copyright law. Thanks for reading!
  • by Qa1 (592969) on Thursday June 01 2006, @08:54AM (#15444266)

    The MPAA can hack servers and harvest private information [slashdot.org] if it wants; not a single MPAA employee would suffer any sort of police harrassment. But someone ostensibly assists violation of MPAA copyrights and BAM! - 200 servers are confiscated by police authorities.

    The reason for this is explained in Sterling's account of the first major institutional crackdown [chriswaltrip.com] on hackers, ezine publishers and other dispensers of information which some powerful corporation don't want to see in the wild. From the text:

    Another problem is very little publicized, but it is a cause of genuine concern. Where there is persistent crime, but no effective police protection, then vigilantism can result. Telcos, banks, credit companies, the major corporations who maintain extensive computer networks vulnerable to hacking -- these organizations are powerful, wealthy, and politically influential. They are disinclined to be pushed around by crooks (or by most anyone else, for that matter). They often maintain well-organized private security forces, commonly run by experienced veterans of military and police units, who have left public service for the greener pastures of the private sector. For police, the corporate security manager can be a powerful ally; but if this gentleman finds no allies in the police, and the pressure is on from his board-of-directors, he may quietly take certain matters into his own hands.

    So police is acting as mercenaries for the big corporations, since otherwise they'd hire their own. Not a very comforting thought, especially considering you are nowadays likely to be arrested for suspicion of violating corporate copyrights. Remember when police and laws were used to protect citizens, not criminialize millions for hurting corporate profit machines...?

  • by Lazy Jones (8403) on Thursday June 01 2006, @08:54AM (#15444275)
    (http://pobox.com/~mjy | Last Journal: Thursday August 02, @02:40PM)
    so don't bother reading it, we already know that stuff ...

  • Piratebay should have (Score:1, Insightful)

    by FudRucker (866063) on Thursday June 01 2006, @08:55AM (#15444283)
    mirrored their data to another machine in another nation where the authorities can not touch it...
  • They were forced to leave DNA (Score:5, Interesting)

    by eddy (18759) on Thursday June 01 2006, @08:57AM (#15444305)
    (http://gazonk.org/~eloj/ | Last Journal: Tuesday June 07 2005, @01:18PM)

    The most amazing thing of all is that the persons that were questioned, were forced to leave DNA. That's totally unheard of, and make one think that maybe this was done, and this will sound completely conspiracy nuts, on request from the US ("MPAA"). Collection of DNA has been reserved for severe crimes; Rape, murder, etc.

    Personally I believe the goal here is to make an example of the ISP, PRQ. Taking non-related servers makes perfect sense in that context. They want to make sure no one dares host trackers, even if it's found to be legal! I believe the charges as they relate to "TPB" will be dropped, but they'll go ahead with materal found on the suspects home computers (sadly, it seems they weren't smart/careful enough to not sample their own warez, so to speak). However, for PR reasons they'll blur this issue, making a case against the individuals based on their home computers seem like a win against trackers.