The Piratebay Verdict

[CattyNebulart]

So I am just wondering how people here feel about the pirate bay verdict. And for an interesting comparison i would like to know if non-americans think
differently about it that americans.

As a european I feel that American judgements are typically way out of line harsh, and I do see the judgement as crazly harsh and the judgemtn flawed on
technical grounds. 80% of torrents on TPB are legal, I don't think this is the case for youtube so would in this case google be liable for a similar
judgement?
E: "Did they... did they just endorse the combination of the JSDF and US Army by showing them as two lesbian lolicons moving in together and holding hands and talking about how 'intimate' they were?"
B: "Have you forgotten so soon? They're phasing out Don't Ask, Don't Tell."

[Wiregeek]

80% of torrents on TPB are legal

citation, please. Cursory examination of 'recent torrents' implies differently.
"No can brain today. Want cheezeburger."
From NGE: Nobody Dies, by Gregg Landsman
http://www.fanfiction.net/s/5579457/1/NGE_Nobody_Dies

[robkelk]

http://www.pelicancrossing.net/netwars/ ... on_th.html]Wendy Grossman said it better than I could:

It ought to be clear by now - though apparently it's not - to entertainment companies that attacking file-sharing sites isn't getting them anywhere. Yes, they can point to having closed down a number of sites, but that's like boasting that you've cut 1,000 heads off the Lernaean Hydra.
...
More to the point, entertainment industry attacks on file-sharing are doing for file-sharing sites what Prohibition did for the Mafia: turning them into sympathetic heroes who are just nobly trying to help their fellow citizens.
...
In the end, The Pirate Bay guys may sound like posturing jerks, but they're right: they may go to jail but file-sharing will live on even if they turn out to be wrong about The Pirate Bay's own invulnerability. The entertainment industry might just as well adopt the slogan, "We won't stop until everyone's a pirate."

--
Rob Kelk
"Governments have no right to question the loyalty of those who oppose
them. Adversaries remain citizens of the same state, common subjects of
the same sovereign, servants of the same law."

- Michael Ignatieff, addressing Stanford University in 2012

[CattyNebulart]

citation, please. Cursory examination of 'recent torrents' implies differently.

It's in the court documents, a sample of 1000 random torrents where taken and examined. This was done twice, a few months apart. Though some people find the numbers a little suspect it's probably close to the truth, however popular torrents are not a random sample.

here is a link to one of the many stories about it.
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news ... -legal.ars

...Prohibition...The entertainment industry might just as well adopt the slogan, "We won't stop until everyone's a pirate."

In the large strokes I agree with that, especially in sweden where almost everyone under 30 has admitted to filesharing, and if most people break the law the law probably needs changing in a democratic country. Also a one year prison sentence is apparently roughly what you get for assault in sweden, add in the almost million dollar fine and it is hard to see another crime that is so harshly punished.
E: "Did they... did they just endorse the combination of the JSDF and US Army by showing them as two lesbian lolicons moving in together and holding hands and talking about how 'intimate' they were?"
B: "Have you forgotten so soon? They're phasing out Don't Ask, Don't Tell."

[Wiregeek]

a sample of 1000 random torrents where taken and examined

I _Feel_ that this is not a good method of gaining an overall picture of what TPB is doing, datawise. I would instead reccomend gathering snapshots of trackers, and going statistical on data transferred...

I do not know if this is technically viable. I just feel that those samples are not representative.
"No can brain today. Want cheezeburger."
From NGE: Nobody Dies, by Gregg Landsman
http://www.fanfiction.net/s/5579457/1/NGE_Nobody_Dies

[CattyNebulart]

I _Feel_ that this is not a good method of gaining an overall picture of what TPB is doing, datawise. I would instead reccomend gathering snapshots of trackers, and going statistical on data transferred...

It depends on what you want to measure say you have 2 torrents A and B, A is the latest X-Men Movie and B is a Linux Distro. Say A has 100 downloaders and 3 seeds and B has 2 downloaders and 10 seeds.

Method 1) In the study quoted they would call that 50% legal torrents.
Method 2) You seem to want to give A more weight because it has more peers (tracker transfer data on peers so more peers means that the trackers recieve and send more data).
Method 3) I think what you actually mean (this is hard on web forums. Why can't everyone talk in assembly? It would be much less ambiguous. Of course it would be a pain to have to be so precise.) is that you want A to count more because it is downloaded more.
Method 4) weigh each torrent by the number of seeds (how? Average over the lifespan of the torrent? Snapshot?) which makes sense in some legal systems where the downloading is not illegal but the uploading is.
Method 5) Some complicated forumla involving datatransfer, number of peers, number of seeds, etc to weight the value of a torrent. Tricky to get people to agree it is a valid messurment.

Some would argue that the proper way to measure it would be Method 1 since that is all TPB has control over, they can't control the popularity of the torrents. Method 1 also has the advantage of being fairly static whereas the others are in constant flux meaning it would be hard to get reliable data.
E: "Did they... did they just endorse the combination of the JSDF and US Army by showing them as two lesbian lolicons moving in together and holding hands and talking about how 'intimate' they were?"
B: "Have you forgotten so soon? They're phasing out Don't Ask, Don't Tell."

[Fidoohki]

Honestly I don't know. I think pirating whole movies is criminal and should be punished but...

it has gotten so muddied with the music industry trying to tie themselves to it that it'll

never be resolved fairly.... *shrugs*

[Epsilon]

I think the Pirate Bays guys were criminals.

I also think the MPAA/RIAA will never stop filesharing.

I think that their old distribution model is broken, and that if they want to make money they should go with a method that has been proven to work: offer legal
downloads of their products at a nominal fee or a one-time streaming upload of a movie for an even smaller fee. Generally speaking, most people are honest and
the majority will still pay a "fair" price for a movie. The trouble is definign what "fair" is. The MPAA/RIAA want to define the term, but
that is because they fail at economics forever.

Econ 101 says that the price of a product will always be determined by a combination of supply and demand. If supply exceeds demand the price will go down, if
demand exceeds supply the price will go up. Until the advent of high-speed internet the MPAA/RIAA had a lock on the "supply" side. Witness "The
Disney Vault" among other marketing scehemes. It was possible for the producers to control how much of their product was available, when it was avaialble
and so on, thus driving up demand and increasing price point. However with the advent of high-speed internet supply has become a variable approaching infinity.
In effect, once a product exist in digital form it is possible to make infinite copies of it and dsitribute it infinitely. This has raised suppyl far higher
than demand and thus should drive price down.

The MPAA/RIAA don't want this. Their business model is built on controlling the supply to stimulate demand so they can charge what they wish. But with
supply far exceeding demand nobody is willing to pay $25 for a single CD of 12 songs, three of which they like. So the MPAA/RIAA resort to draconian means to
try and control the supply, which of course doesn't work. So long as they aren't willing to let the market (ie us) set the price rather then having the
price set by them, they'll continue to engage in such tactics.

In summary: support the iTunes and any other legal pay-for-download music and/or movie sites. The more we the consumer point out that pay-for-download is the
future, the harder and harder it will be for the industry to resist. And for the industry: accept that pirates exist and that you will only ever get $1-2
dollars a song now, refinance your operations accordingly.

------------------

Epsilon

[Fidoohki]

Makes good sense Epsilon.

[CattyNebulart]

And in other news it appears the judge was compromised;
http://www.thelocal.se/19028/20090423/

I think the Pirate Bays guys were criminals.

I disagree, there is a certain bar and level of proof that needs to be met for criminal copyright infringement, and TPB seems not to be at the level where they would be considered such. And the level of evidence required was definitely not in the trial.
Now they might be criminals in other ways, but unless you have some evidence that they are making moonshine or smuggling cocaine on the side I rather doubt it.

TPB is a political tool, and as such it has been performing quite well. Calling them criminal would be similar to calling the NRA or some other political group that is disliked criminal. Now in the USA the piratebay would be criminal since they ignored DMCA noties, but DMCA only applies in the USA and sweden is not a US state.

I also think the MPAA/RIAA will never stop filesharing.

I'm fairly certain you are right about this.

In summary: support the iTunes and any other legal pay-for-download music and/or movie sites. The more we the consumer point out that pay-for-download is the future, the harder and harder it will be for the industry to resist. And for the industry: accept that pirates exist and that you will only ever get $1-2 dollars a song now, refinance your operations accordingly.

I agree with your economic analysis, but I disagree with your summary. The problem with services like iTunes is that most of the cost is the pay barrier, credit cards ussualy charge 0.50$-2.00$ each time they are used or a percentage of the money, whichever is more. I'm sure iTunes has some kind of special deal, otherwise they couldn't charge 1$ per song, and from that 1$ they need to also pay for their own accounting system, their servers, and so forth before paying record labels and artists.* In short the pay barrier adds significantly in cost for everyone (cost of exclusion is high), and the cost of a additional user is low which makes it unlikely that it will continue indefinitly. In fact the classical solution to something which meets those two conditions is the goverment, other things which meet those conditions are roads and the military for example. Now I really don't want to step in and tax for music while making it free to share, it's just the solution to other similar problems.

The only solution I see that has a chance of being acceptable to all parties is to put a fee on copyright that doubles each year, and use that money to enforce copyright. It means that as soon as it becomes unprofitable to hold on to a copyright it will be dropped becoming public domain, while those that have very high value will remain copyrighted for longer, those will also pay far more in taxes to enforcement. This patch to IP systems would need to be global (hah, not happening) for enforcement reasons, and it probably would only work for a few more years until cheap 3d printers make everything more difficult again.

* Some breakdowns I found online claims that each song give apple 0.34$ to cover all those expenses, and 0.65$ go to the labels. Of those 0.65$ 0.10$ go to the artist and 0.025 to producers. So 0.525$, or more than half the price goes to the labels, after deducting the costs for the artists.
E: "Did they... did they just endorse the combination of the JSDF and US Army by showing them as two lesbian lolicons moving in together and holding hands and talking about how 'intimate' they were?"
B: "Have you forgotten so soon? They're phasing out Don't Ask, Don't Tell."

[khagler]

"Some breakdowns I found online claims that each song give apple 0.34$ to cover all those expenses, and 0.65$ go to the labels. Of those 0.65$ 0.10$ go to
the artist and 0.025 to producers. So 0.525$, or more than half the price goes to the labels, after deducting the costs for the artists."

That may be true for artists with major label deals, but independent artists get a much higher percentage. For example, artists who use CD Baby to put their
stuff on iTunes get 59 cents out of the 99.

[Foxboy]

Also, the issue of credit cards charging service fees regardless of value of purchase may have been part of the reasoning behind the iTunes "gift
cards" that are so ubiquitous these days.
''We don't just borrow words; on occasion, English has pursued other languages down alleyways to beat
them unconscious and rifle their pockets for new vocabulary.''

-- James Nicoll

[Fidoohki]

That's why I will never buy Itunes or anything like that. If I want a song bad

enough I'll suck it up and buy the CD. In 7 years I've only bought 3 cds so I'm

not too weak

[Fidoohki]

I just found this...wow...

http://www.cbc.ca/technology/story/2009 ... trial.html

[robkelk]

And in other news it appears the judge was compromised;
http://www.thelocal.se/19028/20090423/

I just found this...wow...

 
http://www.cbc.ca/technology/story/2009 ... trial.html

The lawyer is quite correct in calling for a retrial.

Simply by being a member of those organizations, the judge has the appearance of being biased. He should never have heard the case in the first place.
--
Rob Kelk
"Governments have no right to question the loyalty of those who oppose
them. Adversaries remain citizens of the same state, common subjects of
the same sovereign, servants of the same law."

- Michael Ignatieff, addressing Stanford University in 2012

[Ayiekie]

Quite so. As much as I look forward to those assholes rotting in jail, the judge was clearly not unbiased and they deserve a retrial.

[CattyNebulart]

As much as I look forward to those assholes rotting in jail, the judge was clearly not unbiased and they deserve a retrial.

Wow, what di they ever do to deserve such hatred? Why do you think a jail sentence is just in this case?
E: "Did they... did they just endorse the combination of the JSDF and US Army by showing them as two lesbian lolicons moving in together and holding hands and talking about how 'intimate' they were?"
B: "Have you forgotten so soon? They're phasing out Don't Ask, Don't Tell."

[Fidoohki]

They were pirating movies I think.

[CattyNebulart]

They were pirating movies I think.

I'm fairly sure they didn't pirate movies, way too high risk. They need their record to be spotless.
E: "Did they... did they just endorse the combination of the JSDF and US Army by showing them as two lesbian lolicons moving in together and holding hands and talking about how 'intimate' they were?"
B: "Have you forgotten so soon? They're phasing out Don't Ask, Don't Tell."

[khagler]

Also, even the California Prison Guard's Union might balk at the idea that everyone who's ever pirated a movie deserves to be in jail--if only because
that would leave nobody left in the entire state except cops (who almost certainly pirate movies too, but are above the law) and inmates. Making it hard for
them to eat...

[Ayiekie]

They encourage, aid and abet the illegal downloading of thousands of things a day. I don't approve of that, it's illegal in many countries and I agree
with it being illegal. They also make money from it, which is why they can rot in jail. I hope they get a retrial. I also hope they get found guilty again.

Oh, and the site's primary financier (and one of the four defendants) is a prominent neo-Nazi (http://www.theregister.co.../26/pirate_bay_neo_nazi/ ). Just in case you think they're
nice guys.

[robkelk]

Oh, and the site's primary financier (and one of the four defendants) is a prominent neo-Nazi (%[link=http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/02/26/pirate_bay_neo_nazi/]http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/02/26 ... _neo_nazi/] ). Just in case you think they're nice guys.

The man's political opinions, no matter how reprehensible they may be to the rest of us, have no bearing on the question at hand. Mentioning them only offers a http://www.fallacyfiles.org/adhomine.html#Abusive]red herring for people on both sides of the discussion to chase, IMHO to the detriment of the discussion as a whole.
--
Rob Kelk
"Governments have no right to question the loyalty of those who oppose
them. Adversaries remain citizens of the same state, common subjects of
the same sovereign, servants of the same law."

- Michael Ignatieff, addressing Stanford University in 2012

[CattyNebulart]

The man's political opinions, no matter how reprehensible they may be to the rest of us, have no bearing on the question at hand. Mentioning them only offers a http://www.fallacyfiles.org/adhomine.html#Abusive]red herring for people on both sides of the discussion to chase, IMHO to the detriment of the discussion as a whole.

Finnaly someone who agrees with me on that. Who cares if he is a neo-nazi, that is not a reason to put someone in jail, and so has no bearing on this discussion. I wish people would follow Voltaire, pharaphrasing: "I might not agree with a word you say, but I will defend your right to say it till my death.".
E: "Did they... did they just endorse the combination of the JSDF and US Army by showing them as two lesbian lolicons moving in together and holding hands and talking about how 'intimate' they were?"
B: "Have you forgotten so soon? They're phasing out Don't Ask, Don't Tell."

[Ayiekie]

I said why I thought they should go to jail. You might notice it was before I mentioned their ties to a neo-Nazi, which I mentioned for the exact reason I said
("just in case you think they're nice guys").

I did not at any point suggest they should be put in jail for that, or free speech suppressed. Kindly refrain from slanderous assertions to the contrary. I
mentioned it because it speaks to the quality of their character, and it's not brought up very often because most of the people with interest in the case
are extremely biased towards them.

[Wiregeek]

extremely biased towards them.

Well, I'm glad you're here to be biased against them, then.
"No can brain today. Want cheezeburger."
From NGE: Nobody Dies, by Gregg Landsman
http://www.fanfiction.net/s/5579457/1/NGE_Nobody_Dies