Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook


Forgot your password?

IsoHunt Launches Unofficial KAT Mirror 66

An anonymous reader writes: Torrent site isoHunt appears to have unofficially resurrected KickassTorrents (also known as Kickass Torrents or just KAT) at It might look like the original KAT site, which went down yesterday after alleged founder Artem Vaulin was arrested, but upon closer inspection it's simply a basic mirror. The isoHunt team tells me the KAT mirror is hosting files from the last year to year-and-a-half. So no, not everything is available. Furthermore, there is no forum, no community, and no support. And, you shouldn't get too attached, the administrators warn. Disclaimer: Slashdot doesn't necessarily condone piracy -- at least, in most cases.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

IsoHunt Launches Unofficial KAT Mirror

Comments Filter:
  • So, someone mirrors an out of date torrent site (out of date by a year and a half??? and this is Slashdot frontpage news?

    • by Anonymous Coward

      No, you misread the summary. They are offering content FROM the last year and a half.

  • by jdavidb ( 449077 ) on Thursday July 21, 2016 @04:09PM (#52556653) Homepage Journal

    Disclaimer: Slashdot doesn't condone piracy.

    Why not? Everyone should condone "piracy." Piracy enriches our lives and our culture. Copying brings us more of the things we love. [] The only thing that shouldn't be condoned is using smear words like "piracy" [] to refer to a basic decent act of human behavior.

    • Re: (Score:1, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward

      You know what enriches our lives even more? High quality cultural work, which only gets created when people can live from it. If you take away copyright law, you take away the ability for content creators to live from their creations. Yes, maybe there will be some famous hyped youtube stars who can afford thanks to lots of patreon donors. But for most artists, a world without copyright would be totally disastrous. It is already now very easy for artists to fall into poverty, with copyright gone, it will be

      • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday July 21, 2016 @05:28PM (#52557119)

        This line of reasoning is based on the false notion that the only way for people to be paid for creative works is through copyright. This is absolutely not the case and there are many examples of alternative business models that don't rely on copyright. MMORPG's can earn money because pirating the client game code doesn't get you an account or a server to play on. Almost anything that was made through crowd funding doesn't need copyright because all of the compensation is provided upfront before the work is even created. Downloading songs is no substitute for going to a live concert.
        Not to mention there are likely thousands of un-thought-of models, products, and creative services which have yet to be tried that would not require copyright.

      • by SuricouRaven ( 1897204 ) on Thursday July 21, 2016 @05:45PM (#52557229)

        Not all 'high quality cultural work' is created to sell as a source of income. There are some forms of media that cost too much to be produced any other way, like movies or TV series. But the cost of producing music is so low that many amateurs now produce material just as good as any professional purely as a hobby or for the recognition. Open-source software also thrives, and most of the developers for that are either enthusiasts, or working on behalf of corporate users of the software that need to improve it for their own purposes.

        It could even be argued that for-profit does not produce very good cultural works, because it leads to compromising artistic values in the interests of mass appeal. Hollywood might be taking in the money, but their films are all starting to look very similar now - and how many pop songs are love odes to an unnamed person?

      • by Anonymous Coward

        Yeah! Elvis and all his other dead culture producing friends need to protect that steady revenue stream... Especially since that money flow go people who deserve it.

        It is also beautiful that some people (culture producers) dont have to work in order to survive. Write one song, release it, never ever work again. On top of that, some other dudes in suits will also benefit from it without adding value. Its magic!

        But the absolutely best thing must be software patents like one-click-shop. It is a gift of protect

      • by Anonymous Coward

        Bring up that argument again when Star Wars starts making a profit. Do you realize that including all the movies, toys, books, tv shows, DVDs, etc... they haven't made a single penny in profits yet? Oh, and look into why Hollywood exists. They started on the east cost then moved to the west cost to avoid copyright laws. The entire media industry is built on copyright infringement. There was no such thing as copyright in Shakespeare's time. Do you really believe a single story should be able to support

      • Is there a model of copyright similar to kickstarter where I can produce something and charge for it, and when I make X amount of dollars for it it gets released as open source or creative commons.

        As the content author, it would cover costs and maybe give me some reward if it is worthy, it would give people willing to pay more a first crack at my content. Eventually it will get pirated anyway but if it ends up in creative commons or similar anyone can get it.

        The theory is that if my work is recognized as g

    • by tlhIngan ( 30335 ) <> on Thursday July 21, 2016 @05:55PM (#52557275)

      Why not? Everyone should condone "piracy." Piracy enriches our lives and our culture. Copying brings us more of the things we love. The only thing that shouldn't be condoned is using smear words like "piracy" to refer to a basic decent act of human behavior.

      So why not encourage GPL violators ("pirates" too)? Instead we seem to cheer whenever we find a GPL violator.

      Yes, violating the GPL is copyright infringement, aka piracy. (You don't have to agree to the GPL, but if you don't, it falls back to the "All Rights Reserved" copyright. So if you're distributing binaries without source you're violating basic copyright law).

      You really cannot have it both ways - if you want to encourage piracy, then you encourage people (and companies) to violate the GPL by extension.

      • Yes they can.

        Their whole position is based on whatever benefits them at the moment. Nothing more.

      • by bug1 ( 96678 )

        The GPL encourages copying.

        The only people who "pirate" GPL'ed works are people who dont want to share.

      • by jbn-o ( 555068 ) <> on Thursday July 21, 2016 @10:35PM (#52558497) Homepage

        So why not encourage GPL violators ("pirates" too)? Instead we seem to cheer whenever we find a GPL violator.

        First, we should understand what the propagandistic term "piracy" really means [] and understand that meaning as separate from sharing—a friendly, neighborly thing to do. As the GNU Project points out in it's list of terms to avoid on "theft []": "In general, laws don't define right and wrong. Laws, at their best, attempt to implement justice. If the laws (the implementation) don't fit our ideas of right and wrong (the spec), the laws are what should change. A US judge, presiding over a trial for copyright infringement, recognized that "piracy" and "theft" are smear-words.". This difference gets to the heart of the problem in your point—you're conflating the legal with the ethical and then trying to get others to view all sharing as copyright infringement and all copyright infringement as equivalent because the law frames things in that way.

        We should recognize that the terms of the licenses involved between, say, the GNU General Public License (GPL) and a typical Hollywood movie, are radically different when it comes to doing what friends do: share. One can and should share copies of GPL'd programs. It's easy to do, the GPL is easy to comply with simply by also sharing a copy of the complete corresponding source code of the program at the same time as one shares the binary. By contrast, other famously shared copyrighted items (such as most Hollywood movies) aren't legal to share even if done non-commercially and verbatim. So doing the thing that comes naturally with friends, non-commercial and verbatim sharing, is likely not allowed by that movie's license.

        Since you mention the GPL, a free software license written by Richard Stallman, this is somewhat akin to what Stallman describes in his talks about the freedoms of free software specifically freedom #2: the freedom to help your neighbour. That's the freedom to make copies and distribute them to others, when you wish. This comes from a 2006-03-09 talk [] and you can see how the consideration here is akin to the dilemma one faces should a friend ask for a copy of a Hollywood movie:

        Freedom two is essential on fundamental ethical grounds, so that you can live an upright, ethical life as a member of your community. If you use a program that does not give you freedom number two, you're in danger of falling at any moment into a moral dilemma. When your friend says "that's a nice program, could I have a copy?" At that moment, you will have to choose between two evils. One evil is: give your friend a copy and violate the licence of the program. The other evil is: deny your friend a copy and comply with the licence of the program.

        Once you are in that situation, you should choose the lesser evil. The lesser evil is to give your friend a copy and violate the licence of the program.


        Now, why is that the lesser evil? The reason is that we can assume that your friend has treated you well and has been a good person and deserves your cooperation. The reason we can assume this is that in the other case, if a nasty person you don't really like asked you for help, of course you can say "Why should I help you?" So that's an easy case. The hard case is the case where that person has been a good person to you and other people and you would want to help him normally.

        Whereas, the developer of the program has deliberately attacked the social solidarity of your community. Deliberately tried to separate you from everyone else in the World. So if you can't help doing wrong in some direction or other, better to aim the wrong at somebody who deserves it, who has done something wrong, rather than at somebody who hasn't done anything wrong.


      • by jdavidb ( 449077 )
        Copyleft is just a way to use copyright law to fight copyright. It's an awesome virus. If we lose copyright law, we still win, because then there is no need for copyleft any more.
      • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

        Did you even read the link? Apparently not, so I'll post it here for you, save you a click:

        "Publishers often refer to copying they don't approve of as âoepiracy.â In this way, they imply that it is ethically equivalent to attacking ships on the high seas, kidnapping and murdering the people on them. Based on such propaganda, they have procured laws in most of the world to forbid copying in most (or sometimes all) circumstances. (They are still pressuring to make these prohibitions more complete.)


  • by Anonymous Coward

    "Slashdot doesn't condone piracy."

    Sure..wink, wink, msg rcvd

  • How one sentence can illustrate the sad state of affairs.

    Don't forget to report you do not condone terrorist attacks at the next bombing, or racism when the next white cop shoots a black man.

  • by Anonymous Coward

    Disclaimer: Slashdot doesn't condone piracy.

    But we clearly facilitate and encourage it.

  • I have never heard of Kickass Torrent in the past. Ever. Now I will be very curious just to see on what have they got.

    Now, this attempt to arrest an individual who is hosting a server which has url information reminds me very much of recent LEO work in Orlando Disney park, after a 2 year old was snatched by the alligators.

    It was surprising to see when two days after the accident the local police reported that they, the police officers, have "identified" the "guilty" alligator and "put him down". http://www []

    • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward

      "just hosting url information" *AND* having ~20 million euro in accounts with his name on them.

      See also the TVShack guy. It was ignorable gray area until someone figured out how much money he was making, then he was public enemy number 1.

  • by Anonymous Coward

    However mild the inconvenience, Government lead shutting down torrent sites and IPS blocking of torrent sites is becoming more prevalent. We need a genuine dark net where nothing is centralised and everything is distributed to work around this Government interference. It is our duty to leave our children a network without borders, with the resilience to withstand censorship and snooping.

  • It is indeed a sad day when a site has to declare their affiliation before posting a story.
    What's next?
    This election is being contested by the most unpopular candidates ever. Disclaimer: We are pro democracy
    Current petroleum usage is leading us to a point of no return wrt climate change. Disclaimer: We do not condone pro nuclear groups.
    Malware rampant across all major operating systems. Disclaimer: We do not condemn any particular operating system.
    Black people are more likely to get killed in altercati
  • by BitterOak ( 537666 ) on Thursday July 21, 2016 @05:25PM (#52557097)
    If Slashdot doesn't condone piracy, maybe Slashdot shouldn't categorize stories involving Torrent sites (which host both legal as well as infringing material) under the "piracy" category and show the skull and crossbones icon. It made sense for the original story since copyright charges were filed by the U.S. government and so there was a connection to copyright infringement, but simply alerting users to the availability of torrent sites should not be tagged under piracy, at least if Slashdot doesn't want to give the appearance of condoning piracy.
  • Why isn't there an open API/source block chain system for this yet? Then you could just have an insane number of public portals or just host hour own private one. What am I missing here?
  • by SuricouRaven ( 1897204 ) on Thursday July 21, 2016 @05:51PM (#52557253)

    Don't host a mirror.

    Host a mirror with the entire database available as a torrent.

    Let everyone who wants to take the legal risk launch their own copycat site, with the KAT database as a launchpad so that they can go on to achieve even more. It took a few years to arrest one man in Poland - lets see them arrest twenty, spread over China, Russia, a server in a dorm room that no-one will claim ownership for, and wherever that Tor tunnel terminates.

    • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      They want to replace KAT as the biggest, most popular torrent site by attracting ex-KAT users. That's their motivation.

  • The first WTF was the disclaimer itself, but OK, if you must. Buy then, not one but two sets of weasel words?!!

    "Necessarily", "in most cases". Choose one and leave it at that.

    I'm not necessarily an old pregnant black Kenyan woman most of the time.

    In fact, today I'm a young, white, male, New Zealander.
  • Like many other torrent sites, your Tor browser will hit you with a Captcha. In most cases, every page will open with a new Captcha until you are really angry. But even then the torture will continue until you give up or are willing to share your identity with a non-Tor browser. You'd think that torrent sites would expect users to be on Tor -- so why antagonize them?

  • Checkout - fast & working proxy with all latest torrents. Long live Kickass Torrents

  • KAT's big advantage was its ability to turn any page into an RSS feed. Any combination of search terms and categories you want, you could get an RSS feed of it, including the number of seeders/leechers, the magnet link. link (that site seems to be down as well), user votes up/down, comments, etc.

    I can't emphasize enough just how substantially time-saving that can be. With a small script you can subscribe to ANYTHING and all the new stuff just magically shows up as soon as it is available. Ev

The only possible interpretation of any research whatever in the `social sciences' is: some do, some don't. -- Ernest Rutherford