The Piratebay Verdict

[CattyNebulart]

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").

Rest assured I don't think they are nice guys, or even sane guys, but I do admire them for sticking to their principles.

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 am sorry if I offended you but it is brought up frequently, and I fail to see how it is relevant. Weather they are boyscouts, assholes, chuthulu worshipers, gay, pokemon or whatever really shouldn't matter and the only reason to bring it up is to imply that they are guilty or should recieve a harsher sentence because of X.

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.

It speaks that they are broadminded enough to accept money from people whose politics they probably disagree with. Somehow I do not see it as a rare trait. As I mentioned it is often brough up, just like the time that they left pictures of a burtal murder(*) up on the tracker which hurt their popularity quite a bit, however I believe they where right to stick to their principles.
I do agree however that almost everyone with an interest in the case is baised towards one side or the other (as is almost always the case), however by my tally the entertainment industry has the most news stories written in it's favor. It's really only sites that explicitly are anti-copyright that seem to support TPB.

(*) In sweden police investigations become public domain after the investigation is over, which is ussualy only used by journalists and such. In this case someone took a copy of that and put it on TPB where it got a few downloads before almost fiziling out. Then there was a hughe media storm over these shocking pictures and it became quite widly distributed, and many people, including the father of the mudred girl asked them to take it down.
They refused on two grounds:
1) Principle: They are opposed to censorship and the files are public domain.
2) Practical: Even if they shut down that torrent within seconds any of the thousands of people who already downloaded it could just put it back up.

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]

CattyNebulart wrote:

---

It speaks that they are broadminded enough to accept money from people whose politics they probably disagree with. Somehow I do not see it as a rare trait.

The person in question was one of the four defendants. He is one of the "they".

I can't say as how I know many people who would partner with a neo-Nazi. I certainly wouldn't.

[CattyNebulart]

I HATE YUKU!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I can't say as how I know many people who would partner with a neo-Nazi. I certainly wouldn't.

My guess would be most publicly traded companies and pretty much all charities would which makes you the definite minority, but if you stick to it as a matter of principle I applaud you. If I was offered money to start my own company I would take it, regardless of the political alleigance of my backer.

Long rant/explanation lost due to Yuku.

How many people think Walmarkt is evil and yet they still shop there? Is this hypocritical?

The Piratebay doesn't seem to be pushing the neo-nazi agenda, so why do we care that one of the neo-nazies is backing them? If you say neo-nazies should be opposed in principle would you then be pro-rape if the neo-nazies where against rape? Of course not, only an idiot would be blindly agaisnt anything just because another party is for it.

So I ask again why we should care that they are backed by a neo-nazi? The rest of them don't seem to share that affiliation, and even if they did what bearing should it have on the trial? Freedom of expresion should mean something.
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."

[Epsilon]

CattyNebulart wrote:

---

How many people think Walmarkt is evil and yet they still shop there? Is this hypocritical?

Yes.

I don't shop at Wal-Mart because I beleive it is evil, I encourage others not to.

Similarly the Pirate Bay exist to aid illegal activity. I think it is evil. Much like if someone had a rolodex of known heroin dealers he would introduce you
to, and got paid money to run is "dealer invitation clearing house". Then the person allowed a bunch of people who sell organic vegetables to go
through him as well, just to say he doens't ONLY introduce people to heroin dealers.

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

Epsilon

[Ayiekie]

I also refuse to shop at Walmart because it is evil. I have shopped there maybe three or four times in the last ten years, all of them because I didn't
really have a choice at the time.

As I said before, I mentioned it because that little fact doesn't get much press and it speaks to the quality of their character. I think most people would
be reluctant to partner with neo-Nazis on moral grounds. Incidentally, charities (and politicians) have been known to return donations from morally
reprehensible individuals and organisations.

(By the by, not that it's especially relevant, but the destruction of copyright does fit into his ideology; that is why he sponsors the site.)

[CattyNebulart]

I don't shop at Wal-Mart because I beleive it is evil, I encourage others not to.

Good for you. I think all large companies are evil because of the current incentive structure, and it is somewhat impractical to avoid all of them.

Similarly the Pirate Bay exist to aid illegal activity. I think it is evil. Much like if someone had a rolodex of known heroin dealers he would introduce you to, and got paid money to run is "dealer invitation clearing house". Then the person allowed a bunch of people who sell organic vegetables to go through him as well, just to say he doens't ONLY introduce people to heroin dealers.

I think your analogy is flawed. It's more like someone having a empty rolodex, and letting people add local businesses to it, and showing it to anyone who asks. If drug dealers then add themselves to that that is their buisness, they show the rolodex to the police just as they would to anyone else. Now say someone else claims that person X is a drug dealer, should you go vigilante cop judge and jury on them or should you just say "sure whatever, go away"?

The proper way to get content removed from the piratebay would have been to go to the local court and get an injunction, rather than firing off a threatening DMCA notice that has no effect because they are outside the USA. Of course getting an injunction is far harder and more costly than sending a meaningless boilerplate letter, but that is not their problem. Consider how often DMCA notices are abused and this becomes not an unreasonable stance.
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]

The Pirate Bay exists for the primary purpose of aiding and abetting copyright infringement, as their own name proudly declares. Pretending that their
intentions are innocent and that illegal material just happens to slip in is disingenuous at best.

[Morganite]

Am I the only one who will speak in support of piracy?

There's works produced in even the last ten years that are just *gone*, and older stuff is even worse. You can't buy them new, you can't buy them
used, you can't rent them and you probably can't borrow them either. It's as if they never existed at all.

A lot of really devoted pirates, from what I've seen, don't even watch/listen to/play/whatever half the stuff they download, they're just trying to
get as big a collection as possible. It's one of those e-peen things. But they provide an important service by maintaining a large network of redundant
backups of anything they can get. A work that's been pirated a healthy amount is much less likely to be wiped out by the passage of time.

If copyright laws were constructed more sensibly, I wouldn't support doing this illegally. But by the time copyrights expire under the current system,
it's far too late. So I must support the pirates, because they're helping a good cause whether they think so or not.

-Morgan.

[Ayiekie]

Do you donate money to archives that preserve that sort of thing?

Most pirates collect the most popular stuff, not the obscure things, so it's hardly something to be relied on (if it was, nothing would have been lost in
the last ten years, after all). On a personal level, I don't really have a problem with piracy of abandoned IP or incredibly obscure things that are
impossible to get or compensate the creators for. Things you can buy, things you're going to be able to get easily in a month or two... that's
something else again.

[Morganite]

Don't those archives have to wait for something to go into the public domain? Waiting that long is too risky, especially if there's a risk of
destroying a copy while converting to digital format. At least some of the work has to be done while it's still possible to go out and buy another copy.

It might depend on the community, but I don't see popularity being as much of a driver as the sheer fact that something exists. How else do you explain
people chomping at the bit to get a copy of a -completley unplayable- game?

What I'd really prefer is laws that allow copyright on commercial works to be extended indefinately as long as it's still possible to buy a new copy at
a fair price - but once there's no way to get a new copy, it goes into the public domain immediately. But I don't think that's likely to happen.
So, even though piracy as a preservation system isn't perfect, it's a lot better at it than not having it would be.

-Morgan.

[Epsilon]

Morganni wrote:

---

Don't those archives have to wait for something to go into the public domain?

Quick. Go to your local library. Look for the latest Harry Potter book.

Now question: Is Harry Potter in the public domain?

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

Epsilon

[Morganite]

I've never noticed the library I go to producing and distributing mass numbers of copies of... anything, really..., so they aren't the sort of archive
being discussed here. That would be something like Project Gutenberg.

Of course, everything they distribute is either public domain, or copyrighted works that they've been granted permission to distribute. I'm unaware of
any organization that acquires books and other media with the intent of holding them securely until they enter the public domain (which takes a while) so that
they can be converted to electronic media. A library isn't suitable for the task, as to fulfill their mandate, they actually lend books out, and those
books don't always come back, and sometimes the ones that do come back are never the same again. Not to mention that libraries regularly sell old books to
make room for new ones. They can't be relied upon for all-encompassing preservation effort.

-Morgan.

[CattyNebulart]

I had some comments earlier, but the abysmal combination of Yuku and Comcast ate them. I wish I had something as fast and stable as a dailup connection.

For the kind of archive you are talking about look to the library of congress. And yes current copyright law is creating problems for them, esspecially the
DMCA.
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."

[CattyNebulart]

Well Lundstrom's right wing onnections are again in the news, but this time with at least a bit more balance.

For those of you who don’t know, Carl Lundström is the CEO and largest shareholder of Rix Telecom, one of Sweden’s largest ISPs. However, in his private life, Lundström also has a history of funding a couple of right-wing parties like Sverigedemokratema(The Swedish Democrats) for instance. Though, this is in addition to his financial support for The Red Cross, Save the Children Foundation, and The Liberal Party as well. I guess it’s easier to find more people that will hate an alleged “right-wing sympathizer” than it is a left-wing one. We all know this is just as much the case here in The United States. But, does that mean is everyone supposed to stop working for the guy?

from http://www.zeropaid.com/news/8741/the_p ... lesharing/]%[link=http://www.zeropaid.com/news/8741/the_pirate_bay_called_a_rightwing_effort_to_reach_young_people_through_filesharing/]http://www.zeropaid.com/news/8741/the_p ... lesharing/]
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."

[CattyNebulart]

The Pirate Bay exists for the primary purpose of aiding and abetting copyright infringement, as their own name proudly declares. Pretending that their intentions are innocent and that illegal material just happens to slip in is disingenuous at best.

Their intentions are not innocent, they are political. Also they are following the letter of the law, while trying to avoid the spirit of the law. But those who think that the current spirit of the law is right would do well to remember who paid for the current law.
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]

CattyNebulart wrote:

---

Well Lundstrom's right wing onnections are again in the news, but this time with at least a bit more balance.

You posted an article on a Pirate Bay owner from Zeropaid and called it "balance". Wow. That takes some cheek, I'll give you that.

[Morganite]

CattyNebulart, was I just imagining it during the forum issues, or did you respond to this again at some point? '.'

-Morgan.

[CattyNebulart]

CattyNebulart, was I just imagining it during the forum issues, or did you respond to this again at some point? '.'

I didn't but I think I saw some posts with a date into the future, so maybe at some point i will have.

You posted an article on a Pirate Bay owner from Zeropaid and called it "balance". Wow. That takes some cheek, I'll give you that.

As for the article being balanced, it does give some facts most articles conveniently ignore. Did you read der Spiegel article? Some checking shows that zeropaid probably had the facts right, and considering how often the neo-nazi angle is played up without anyone brining up those facts it's the most balanced article I have seen on the subject. I don't think this particular article is baised, though zeropaid does seem to have a pro-piratebay stance generally. But there is the problem that http://arstechnica.com/media/news/2008/ ... n-does.ars]ideology trumphs facts so I can't trust my own judgment. Being human sucks.

Second get the myth of a perfectly balanced new source out of your head, there is always a bais.
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]

So, if you did some "checking" that shows that "Zeropaid probably had the facts right", would you care to link to those, presumably more
reliable sources?

A site that exists expressly for the advancement and promotion of file-sharing is a hell of a lot more biased in this matter than the Register.

[CattyNebulart]

So, if you did some "checking" that shows that "Zeropaid probably had the facts right", would you care to link to those, presumably more reliable sources?

Sure, the facts that I more or less verified:
1) Fredrik Neij worked at Rix telecom. This is mentioned on several dozen websites and not disputed anywhere that i could find, but none strike me as esspecially reliable. repeating something often doesn't make it true, but that is all I could find. I believe sweden puts the tax returns of people online (or used to, they might have stopped), does anyone know the website for that?
2) Carl Lundstrom owned and ran Rix telecom. http://www.linkedin.com/pub/0/998/550

Stuff i couldn't find:
1) If Rix telecom gave such discounts as a standard benefit to employees. Or if it was a one off deal. It is often implied it was a one off deal but that seems to come from a talk show, and not with Carl Lundstrom. It's fairly standard for companies to give such side benefits (my last employer did forinstance) so i find the point raised in the talk show that he must have gotten some benefit from it ridiculus. with English subtitles some of the things where later corrected, he didn't give servers, just server space (as normal for these kinds of arrangements.) however I can't find the link to that at the moment.
2) Rix Telecom customers include the red cross and others. I traced a few websites back to their hosts but none of the ip addresses resolved to Rix telecom, though they supposedly had around 10'000 buisneses hosted before they where bought by Phonera AB. the websites might have switched providers or I was testing the wrong websites. Or they have multiple hosting providers with load balancing, or....

stuff i didn't bother to find
1) IFPI smear campaing. I have seen enough news to believe it without checking for it.
2) Chat is mainly about other things (women, beer, hardware) than politics. If a bunch of young men claimed otherwise I would be tempted to call bullshit.
3) Piratebay part of a effort to convert people to right wing extremism. my only comment; LOL.
4) Rix telecomunications didn't lose money on the piratebay. Internal accounting information for most companies is kept secret, so i didn't even bother to try and find the information.

most links are missing because I don't feel like typing dozens of links into yuku, plus I'd need to crawl back over several days of history to see which sites contained what. but more important I didn't find anything disputing the claims in the article.
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]

Uh-huh. That doesn't seem to do much to address:

1) That he is a financier of several right-wing groups and a member of Bevara Sverige Svenskt ("Keep Sweden Swedish").

2) That he has donated money to the white supremacist/separatist National Democrats party of Sweden (it's also an anti-homosexual and anti-immigration
party, which has marched with openly Nazi parties like the National Socialist Front).

3) That he has ordered white supremacist literature from hate groups.

4) That he was indicted and charged with assault in 1986 for being involved in an altercation with immigrants.

The first three were indeed originally reported by the Swedish left-wing magazine Expo (but a left-wing magazine has no reason to be biased against Lundström
or the Pirate Bay, only his political affiliations), but have not been contradicted by any other news agency and only the third wouldn't be a matter of
public record anyway (also, they have since appeared in other Swedish news sources). The fourth is also a matter of public record and comes from a different
Swedish article.

You don't seem to have found anything that contradicts them.

[CattyNebulart]

You don't seem to have found anything that contradicts them.

You seem under the impression that i think he is a nice guy, I don't. However I also don't think his political view matter. Lets use the follwing example to understand why;

Suppose there is worker who believes abortion is murder, and her/his boss that is pro abortion.
1) Is the employee moraly obligated to stop working there? (I think no, but I know some will disagree)
2) If the employee keeps working there should he take advantage of healthcare and other benefits that are paid for by someone s/he believes is evil? (I'd say of course, it's just a buisness transaction politics shouldn't enter into it.)
3) Suppose both of them vote republican, and it's a slow day so the boss gives the worker time off to attend a republican rally. Should the worker take advanatge of that? (very thorny ethic issue IMHO, unless the boss gives the same oppertunity to all his workers for whatever political party they belong to.)

What my fact checking established is that at least zeropaid didn't just make up all the stuff in the article, so on the balance I'd trust them to have the facts right. some news organisations just make up the news, and if that can happen at an organisation like the new york times why should you trust any website?
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]

Zeropaid denied that the reports that he was a Neo-Nazi were true. They were wrong (or, at the least, provided absolutely no evidence to support this). I
don't really care about your complaints about "news organisations", which are simply not relevent to the question at hand.

I said before that I would not take money from a Neo-Nazi white supremacist (and the comparison to Republicans and the abortion issue is tasteless; I don't
agree with the average Republican on much, but there's a WORLD of difference between "Republican" and "Neo-Nazi"). And anybody who does
is, in my book, a complete fucking scumbag. Apparently you think otherwise, though that didn't stop you from hastily leaping to try and defend him.

Insofar as "this openly biased source didn't make up everything they said, so I assume they're right about everything" position... yeah.
Let's just say I don't buy it for what to me are fairly self-evident reasons.

Anyway, this isn't getting much of anywhere. You asked me why I think they should rot in jail. It is because they are bad people who broke the law. The
breaking the law is the important part, the fact they are bad people is icing on the schadenfreude cake.

[CattyNebulart]

Zeropaid denied that the reports that he was a Neo-Nazi were true.

They did? My reading comprehension must be going. In fact zeropaid wrote something like this;

However, in his private life, Lundström also has a history of funding a couple of right-wing parties like...

hmm if I read that right they agree that he is a Neo-Nazi.

...and the comparison to Republicans and the abortion issue is tasteless; I don't agree with the average Republican on much, but there's a WORLD of difference between "Republican" and "Neo-Nazi"

Yes there is a substantial difference between the two, and I am not comparing the two. Please read it again, carefully. and maybe answer the questions with some reasoning for why.

And anybody who does is, in my book, a complete fucking scumbag. Apparently you think otherwise, though that didn't stop you from hastily leaping to try and defend him.

I do think otherwise, in my view buisness is buisness and personal views should intrude very little. otherwise you get stores that won't serve blacks and other such bad things. I'm fairly sure a lawsuit for discrimination can be brought against you if you do that kind of discrimiation based on political affiliattion. And I am not defending him so much as I'm defending the other 3, the link that the media likes to play up seems fairly minor.

One of them worked for him, and he allowed an employee to use some relatively minor company resources for a private project. Big fucking deal.

I don't even know the political affiliation of my former bosses, and quite frankly neither do I care. Do you know you know affiliations of your bosses and every intermediate middle management person between you and them? Do you know the political affiliations of the others you work with? The affiliations of your clients? What degree of separation is acceptable?

Insofar as "this openly biased source didn't make up everything they said, so I assume they're right about everything" position... yeah. Let's just say I don't buy it for what to me are fairly self-evident reasons.

Fair enough, do you have anything to suggest they are wrong?

Anyway, this isn't getting much of anywhere. You asked me why I think they should rot in jail. It is because they are bad people who broke the law. The breaking the law is the important part, the fact they are bad people is icing on the schadenfreude cake.

I agree, the discussion has gotten off topic. Shal we agree to disagree on weather they are bad people?

I actually have to disagree with you there in sweden what they did was not against the law, it's at worst in a grey area (based on a paper by a swedish legal scholar explaining the details, however can't find the link). However I am not qualified to discuss swedish law in detail, however using the law as a moral guideline seems wrong to me. however rereading my original question I do seem that the wording is way too vague. Is the outcome of the piratebay trial ethically or morally right?
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]

Looks like they're staying
in jail. I'd be curious to know the whole text of the decision, since the bias seemed obvious, but a) all that information did come from the usual
file-sharing apologist sites, and b) I'm not certain what the relevant Swedish laws are.

If the pro-PB sites were correct, I'm a bit antsy about this. But if not, well, they're rotting in jail and stuck with a huge fine and that gives me
warm fuzzies.